AM Limited COP8 HMRC Investigation Letter..

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Not sure how a Corporation Tax issue around payments into an EBT has relevance to an issue on the loans from an EBT to contractor's but hey ho… Good or Bad dependant on outcome

HMRC will interpret anything in a way that suits them. That's why Follower Notices are so open to abuse because they alone get to decide what's similar.

[jbryce]

Not wishing to rain on anyone's parade but you need to consider that the Ranger's case may not have a massive bearing on your cases. The trusts were set up for the benefit of people who were actually employed by Rangers i.e. there would have been MOO and SDC whereas the schemes that have been mentioned on here appear, on the face of it, to be sham arrangements. I may be wrong but I assume that you received payment via a trust from the scheme provider but you actually worked for a third party? Again, it's only conjecture, but I would guess that a judge would not see enough similarities between the Ranger's case and the schemes mentioned on here to just decide that the precedent set in the ruling quashed HMRC's claims.

This is a fair point, but HMRC have referred to their 'upcoming victory' to my accountant when discussing my EBT - they just glossed over Boyle ('we don't need that').

If HMRC had won, the advice given by my EBT-hating tax accountant would have been to consider settling. His advice now is to not settle as he's seeing evidence that the HMRC have overstretched themselves on the assumption of a Rangers victory.

Rangers doesn't set a precedent, it just illustrates that HMRC do not always win and puts in judge's minds the fact that EBTs and loans may be effective.

They'll issue a pile of APNs, but how keen, I wonder, will they be to pursue them to an FTT......

[centurian]

They'll issue a pile of APNs, but how keen, I wonder, will they be to pursue them to an FTT......

They don't need to pursue it to FTT. Once the APNs are issued, people have to pay up - there is no appeal process.

It's then up to the taxpayers to pursue HMRC through the FTT - if they have the wads of cash required to get to FTT.

HMRC could force the issue to get to FTT by demanding interest/penalties, but once they have the APN cash, they will just kick it into the long grass.

[jbryce]

They don't need to pursue it to FTT. Once the APNs are issued, people have to pay up - there is no appeal process.

It's then up to the taxpayers to pursue HMRC through the FTT - if they have the wads of cash required to get to FTT.

HMRC could force the issue to get to FTT by demanding interest/penalties, but once they have the APN cash, they will just kick it into the long grass.

..which reinforces the point. Why settle? If you settle you pay interest, if you pay the APN you don't. Sorry, but it's bonkers.

[lightball]

AML Limited v HMRC investigation

I used AML in 2013 for less than a year and have received no letters from HMRC. I decided to use them this year as I don't have any other choice.

if HMRC ever bothers me. All I'm going to say to them. If you repay my loan first I will then be able to pay your flipping tax.

There are lots of people taking up the loan from their banks. Are they also after them? No, so they should not even go there.

In reality you have agreed and sign up to get the loan and that's what you were getting. A LOAN.

How are you going to pay it back is none of their business.

If that is not a good defence then all these people with the bank loans are doomed too.

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

I used AML in 2013 for less than a year and have received no letters from HMRC. I decided to use them this year as I don't have any other choice.

if HMRC ever bothers me. All I'm going to say to them. If you repay my loan first I will then be able to pay your flipping tax.

There are lots of people taking up the loan from their banks. Are they also after them? No, so they should not even go there.

In reality you have agreed and sign up to get the loan and that's what you were getting. A LOAN.

How are you going to pay it back is none of their business.

If that is not a good defence then all these people with the bank loans are doomed too.

Are you sure you don't have a choice? You could set up a Limited Company or you could use a PAYE umbrella company.

With regard to the loan - when you are loaned money from a bank you sign a contract which commits you to paying the loan back over a given period of time at a set rate of interest. The arrangements HMRC are targeting are invariably sham arrangements - there is no intention that the 'loan' will ever be repaid. The money received is earnings from a contract and the loan arrangement serves no other purpose than to avoid tax.

[cojak]

I have copied the last two threads into http://forums.contractoruk.com/hmrc-...r-schemes.html as lightball is moving into generic 'we shall fight them on the beaches' territory.

This is thread is for specific AML posts.

[jbryce]

I used AML in 2013 for less than a year and have received no letters from HMRC. I decided to use them this year as I don't have any other choice.

if HMRC ever bothers me. All I'm going to say to them. If you repay my loan first I will then be able to pay your flipping tax.

There are lots of people taking up the loan from their banks. Are they also after them? No, so they should not even go there.

In reality you have agreed and sign up to get the loan and that's what you were getting. A LOAN.

How are you going to pay it back is none of their business.

If that is not a good defence then all these people with the bank loans are doomed too.

you weren't using an EBT if it was 2013. The scheme may be effective, who knows.
Use an Umbrella, a real one, it's totally less pain.

[neo222]

Are you sure you don't have a choice? You could set up a Limited Company or you could use a PAYE umbrella company.

With regard to the loan - when you are loaned money from a bank you sign a contract which commits you to paying the loan back over a given period of time at a set rate of interest. The arrangements HMRC are targeting are invariably sham arrangements - there is no intention that the 'loan' will ever be repaid. The money received is earnings from a contract and the loan arrangement serves no other purpose than to avoid tax.

Why doesn't the AML trust either ask for the loan to be paid back at £1 per month?

I'd be happy with that and it would be in the interest of the Trustees.

AML said they would be providing an update at the beginning of September so looking forward to that.

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

Why doesn't the AML trust either ask for the loan to be paid back at £1 per month?

I'd be happy with that and it would be in the interest of the Trustees.

AML said they would be providing an update at the beginning of September so looking forward to that.

Because that would still be a sham arrangement. Institutions loan money to make money and the higher the risk the higher the reward - look at Wonga and co. with their 1000%+ interest. An arrangement whereby the instigator of the loan got no financial reward but the recipient of the loan benefited from reduced taxes would still be viewed as a tax avoidance scheme.