HMRC enquiries for EBT schemes through SANZAR

[z4thras]

Being honest I'm not sure what any paperwork I had did or didn't say, like all these things the scheme providers weren't exactly open in the way they worked (i know it was a bad idea ).

No idea how solid Sanzar's schemes were..........although judging by the way they swiftly vanished I suspect they weren't quite that solid !

I was under the impression that not that many people had paid up at all, and that in fact most had appealed ?

So I assume that at some point (months or years), HMRC will either need to challenge the scheme or close down the assessment ? Surely they can't leave it open forever ?

well so far the figures for the assessment are plucked out the air you some HMRC arithmetic, but doubt HMRC will go after sazar as that is no longer in existance and getting any paperwork could prove difficult. i have been trying to contact [email protected] for last few days but no response i believe we may be on our own to appeal.

cheers

[MrO666]

well so far the figures for the assessment are plucked out the air you some HMRC arithmetic, but doubt HMRC will go after sazar as that is no longer in existance and getting any paperwork could prove difficult. i have been trying to contact [email protected] for last few days but no response i believe we may be on our own to appeal.

cheers

If they can't go after Sanzar then it may be equally difficult for them to go after the users of the scheme. The only people who have sufficient knowledge of the scheme to actually tackle HMRC over it would be sanzar. As individuals we all supplied DOTAS numbers on our tax returns to confirm use of a specific scheme, as such HMRC should already have been made aware of how the scheme was made up. If they either don't have that information or can't get it, then how can the prove anything either way ?

For HMRC to prove that the money was income and not loans, then surely they need to prove that the scheme was either illegal or incorrectly setup. Seeing as it's potentially going to be quite difficult for them to do this (given that sanzar don't exist anymore), how are they going progress it ?

I for one would just continue to maintain that I was a user of a legal scheme of which HMRC were made fully aware of at the time. If they want me to pay them anything then they need to first investigate the scheme..........

[porrker]

If they can't go after Sanzar then it may be equally difficult for them to go after the users of the scheme. The only people who have sufficient knowledge of the scheme to actually tackle HMRC over it would be sanzar. As individuals we all supplied DOTAS numbers on our tax returns to confirm use of a specific scheme, as such HMRC should already have been made aware of how the scheme was made up. If they either don't have that information or can't get it, then how can the prove anything either way ?

For HMRC to prove that the money was income and not loans, then surely they need to prove that the scheme was either illegal or incorrectly setup. Seeing as it's potentially going to be quite difficult for them to do this (given that sanzar don't exist anymore), how are they going progress it ?

I for one would just continue to maintain that I was a user of a legal scheme of which HMRC were made fully aware of at the time. If they want me to pay them anything then they need to first investigate the scheme..........

It would be a dangerous assumption that HMRC do not understand the scheme mechanics and it would be irrelevant in challenging you.

They will argue that the scheme was setup purely as an artificial vehicle just to avoid tax due to DOTAS SRN. You will need to prove that your relationship with Sanzar was not artificial and the loans are valid under your agreement with Sanzar and the Trust and not disguised renumeration attracting a tax liability. Hence having the correct paperwork will be essential to any tribunal.

[MrO666]

It would be a dangerous assumption that HMRC do not understand the scheme mechanics and it would be irrelevant in challenging you.

They will argue that the scheme was setup purely as an artificial vehicle just to avoid tax due to DOTAS SRN. You will need to prove that your relationship with Sanzar was not artificial and the loans are valid under your agreement with Sanzar and the Trust and not disguised renumeration attracting a tax liability. Hence having the correct paperwork will be essential to any tribunal.

I'm right in thinking no matter what though, HMRC will still need to go to court etc and actually prove that the said scheme was either illegal or weak etc ? They can't just decided for themselves that this is the case can they ?

If so, there must be hundreds if not thousands of schemes they need to take to court........this could take years and years. I guess the bigger question will be IF and when HMRC decide to try and challenge it.

I think it's safe to say that no users if these schemes have sufficient paperwork to argue these in any tribunal.....and nor would I attempt to do so.

We should also still remember that tax avoidance is 100% legal, so just because there is a DOTAS number, that doesn't immediately mean that what one was doing is / was wrong.

[z4thras]

I'm right in thinking no matter what though, HMRC will still need to go to court etc and actually prove that the said scheme was either illegal or weak etc ? They can't just decided for themselves that this is the case can they ?

If so, there must be hundreds if not thousands of schemes they need to take to court........this could take years and years. I guess the bigger question will be IF and when HMRC decide to try and challenge it.

I think it's safe to say that no users if these schemes have sufficient paperwork to argue these in any tribunal.....and nor would I attempt to do so.

We should also still remember that tax avoidance is 100% legal, so just because there is a DOTAS number, that doesn't immediately mean that what one was doing is / was wrong.

just received E-mail from Contractor helpdesk now Contractor Helpdesk

[MrO666]

just received E-mail from Contractor helpdesk now Contractor Helpdesk

Saying what ?

[z4thras]

Saying what ?

Email received

Thank you for letting us know about your recent correspondence from HMR&C. We fully understand how unsettling that experience can be.

WHAT IS CONTRACTOR HELPDESK’S ROLE?

Contractor Helpdesk (CH) are specialists in the field of contractor remuneration and so well placed to comment on such matters. A number of promoters who sold tax avoidance schemes back then are no longer in the market place, therefore CH can help you to better understand your potential options regarding how to respond. It is important to remember that CH is not able to provide you with tax advice, so we recommend that you always seek independent tax advice before engaging in any contact with HMR&C.

Help us to help you in the first instance by going onto our website;

Contractor Helpdesk

And under the “Speak To Us” section, please provide us with all the necessary details and contact information, along with scanned images of all pages of their correspondence (front and back, including any pages showing how they have calculated their figures – via our ‘upload a file’ facility), then we will be able to look into this matter further for you – engaging with other specialists in this area as required.

Once we have this, we will aim to come back to you within the next 5 working days. We are aware the HMRC typically impose a deadline for any response to be received. You can rest assured we will respond as soon as we are able so there is no need to chase us for a response. We appreciate your understanding.

In the meantime, please do take the time to check out this link which has some helpful tips;

Contractor Helpdesk

[porrker]

I'm right in thinking no matter what though, HMRC will still need to go to court etc and actually prove that the said scheme was either illegal or weak etc ? They can't just decided for themselves that this is the case can they ?

If so, there must be hundreds if not thousands of schemes they need to take to court........this could take years and years. I guess the bigger question will be IF and when HMRC decide to try and challenge it.

I think it's safe to say that no users if these schemes have sufficient paperwork to argue these in any tribunal.....and nor would I attempt to do so.

We should also still remember that tax avoidance is 100% legal, so just because there is a DOTAS number, that doesn't immediately mean that what one was doing is / was wrong.

I expect the scheme is 100% legal. HMRC are not contesting this... They are challenging the fact that UK residents used a contrived and artificial vehicle to escape declaring renumeration that attracts income tax. HMRC I expect believes the use of a DOTAS number supports their position that tax was denied through disguised renumeration. It will be for you to prove that in fact the loans are valid and the loans are not disguising taxable renumeration.

[MrO666]

I expect the scheme is 100% legal. HMRC are not contesting this... They are challenging the fact that UK residents used a contrived and artificial vehicle to escape declaring renumeration that attracts income tax. HMRC I expect believes the use of a DOTAS number supports their position that tax was denied through disguised renumeration. It will be for you to prove that in fact the loans are valid and the loans are not disguising taxable renumeration.

So what we're actually saying here is that HMRC have the right to work in a polar opposite way to the law. If I was arrested in a criminal charge, the crown would need to prove that I had done something, it's not for me t prove I didn't. Whereas in the case of HMRC, they don't actually need to do anything except demand money from somebody unless the individual can prove they don't owe it.

So innocent until proven guilty applies to everything in the UK except for HMRC it seems.

On a slightly different track......the powers of discovery. We all know that HMRC are only allowed to use their supposed 'powers of discovery' in the event that they have actually discovered something. In the case of most people on this forum, they would have clearly disclosed a DOTAS number on their tax return. In addition I know that my scheme provider lodged a P60 with HMRC clearly showing all loans I received during the period. With that in mind, HMRC have not discovered a single thing, and as such surely they're not legally entitled to claim that they have.

Absolutely all information HMRC required to dispute these tax years was provided to them within the correct timescales. Therefore surely the standard 12 month window is all that they're entitled to. By HMRC saying that they've 'discovered' something, they're actually lying.

I'm assuming that during any court case HMRC would be legally obligated to explain exactly what new information they have discovered over and above what was originally given to them. Assuming that nothing was discovered, then I don't see how these assessments would be legal.

?

[porrker]

So what we're actually saying here is that HMRC have the right to work in a polar opposite way to the law. If I was arrested in a criminal charge, the crown would need to prove that I had done something, it's not for me t prove I didn't. Whereas in the case of HMRC, they don't actually need to do anything except demand money from somebody unless the individual can prove they don't owe it.

So innocent until proven guilty applies to everything in the UK except for HMRC it seems.

On a slightly different track......the powers of discovery. We all know that HMRC are only allowed to use their supposed 'powers of discovery' in the event that they have actually discovered something. In the case of most people on this forum, they would have clearly disclosed a DOTAS number on their tax return. In addition I know that my scheme provider lodged a P60 with HMRC clearly showing all loans I received during the period. With that in mind, HMRC have not discovered a single thing, and as such surely they're not legally entitled to claim that they have.

Absolutely all information HMRC required to dispute these tax years was provided to them within the correct timescales. Therefore surely the standard 12 month window is all that they're entitled to. By HMRC saying that they've 'discovered' something, they're actually lying.

I'm assuming that during any court case HMRC would be legally obligated to explain exactly what new information they have discovered over and above what was originally given to them. Assuming that nothing was discovered, then I don't see how these assessments would be legal.

?

I don't think you can compare this to a guilty/innocence of a criminal act. You have not committed evasion or any other criminal act. You entered into an arrangement that HMRC are challenging as disguising renumeration. You will need show the arrangement and subsequent loans as valid. Failure to comply and supply supporting evidence to HMRC or a tribunal will not help your cause.