HMRC enquiries for EBT schemes through SANZAR

[DonkeyRhubarb]

There's a big difference between being under enquiry and having an open appeal to a discovery assessment. The new law deals with each in slightly different ways

Can you elaborate because I can't see much material difference in the way AP deals with open enquiries -vs- pending appeals.

[dezze]

Absolutely !

Either way, can anybody on here see the IoM solutions even existing past 2014 ? Even if they do you'd need to be a clown to use them, but even so I think they will all shut up shop in the coming months, leaving every scheme user of the last few years very much high and dry.

When was the last time anybody had any communication from either CH or CM ?

I can. Firstly, you would be surprised how many people have no idea what's going on. They see that 'rich people' like David Beckham et al are being nobbled, but when the smooth talking salesperson calls, they are reassured that their scheme is totally different and will never have an issue. In recent days, their patter can only be backed up by reference to the Rangers case (as it's been in the news).

I know people (intelligent & savvy) that have been on schemes and have appealed demands, and have moved onto the next scheme offered by the same provider. Again, as it's 'totally different' and will never have an issue.

As I said, I think there is a market out there for people that have never heard of APN and don't understand the degree of action against Tax Avoidance HMRC is undertaking for that matter. Sure as dammit, the salesperson isn't going to tell them - APN is virtually upon us and these schemes are still busy selling.

NB personally I wouldn't touch one with a very, very long bargepole.

[malvolio]

Don't confuse a Discovery Assessment with actively being under investigation.

As somebody else has already posted, what possible reason would HMRC have to progress these cases once they've already got your money. I suspect that you'll see HMRC do absolutely zero until at some point in a few years, somebody with enough money decides enough is enough and forces HMRC to court. Then and only then will you start to see HMRC acknowledge that they can't keep the money without ever resolving the case. For anyone thinking they will pay the APN and this will be settled in a year or so...........think again.

We now have a government that seems very unconcerned about the general basis of law (innocent until proven guilty). You can bet your arse that if companies like Amazon and Goldman were to get demands for their quite clear usage of 'tax avoidance', then there's no way they would pay them, but they have the money to battle HMRC......and lets be honest, HMRC are not going to be keen to go toe to toe with the best tax lawyers on earth.

You really shouldn't use Amazon and friends in an argument for your own cases. They are covered by multiple international agreements that are very difficult to unpick. Yours are all about UK Taxation. So while the principle is exactly the same, the potential for a solution is vastly different

[MrO666]

You really shouldn't use Amazon and friends in an argument for your own cases. They are covered by multiple international agreements that are very difficult to unpick. Yours are all about UK Taxation. So while the principle is exactly the same, the potential for a solution is vastly different

It was more a case of just pointing out that the people that potentially owe serious money (millions) will be the very last people that HMRC would dare to rattle....if ever, as they know the sh1t storm that companies such as Amazon would throw at theme is probably more than they could handle.

As for me, APN's are irrelevant as I've already made my peace with HMRC in my own way. I will not be receiving APN's, so my views on here are purely just views from a more or less bystander.

With regards to the other poster saying that the salesperson wouldn't mention the issues. I thought once this was in law, then they are legally obligated to explain this to the end user, and as sly as the scheme owners are, i'm not sure they want to openly and blatantly break the law. Sly is one thing, clearly acting illegally is another.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

With regards to the other poster saying that the salesperson wouldn't mention the issues. I thought once this was in law, then they are legally obligated to explain this to the end user, and as sly as the scheme owners are, i'm not sure they want to openly and blatantly break the law. Sly is one thing, clearly acting illegally is another.

I think you'll find from now on that most schemes don't need to be DOTAS registered so APN won't be an issue.

[MrO666]

I think you'll find from now on that most schemes don't need to be DOTAS registered so APN won't be an issue.

Surely they would however be 100% in target under the GAAR though ?

If the government really wants to lock this down once and for all, why don't they just say if you're caught using Tax Avoidance schemes after X date, which falls foul of the law, then you WILL be hit with a 100% tax penalty....no ifs or buts.

Enough publicity around that and only the most hardcore or stupid people will attempt to use them.

[Rob79]

HMRC is quite active in identifying schemes that in their opinion should have been registered under DOTAS but were not.

There is a penalty for not doing so but in terms of the numbers involved, these were minor.

What is interesting is whether HMRC can issue APN's where a scheme should have been registered.

As usual this is the subjective view of HMRC with no checks and balances.

[jbryce]

criminal

Surely they would however be 100% in target under the GAAR though ?

If the government really wants to lock this down once and for all, why don't they just say if you're caught using Tax Avoidance schemes after X date, which falls foul of the law, then you WILL be hit with a 100% tax penalty....no ifs or buts.

Enough publicity around that and only the most hardcore or stupid people will attempt to use them.

...depends on the scheme - the current crop (Tax Devil etc.) are plain ineffective. Fraud?
Serious schemes require teams of lawyers to keep them bouncing along - these d15k&he@ds who are targeting contractors at the moment will have no idea what they are doing.

Does anyone, anyone know anyone still in a scheme? Contractors mental enough to be in one now would probably be too stupid to get a job anyway. Hopefully.

Gauke has killed off schemes for contractors.

[dezze]

...depends on the scheme - the current crop (Tax Devil etc.) are plain ineffective. Fraud?
Serious schemes require teams of lawyers to keep them bouncing along - these d15k&he@ds who are targeting contractors at the moment will have no idea what they are doing.

Does anyone, anyone know anyone still in a scheme? Contractors mental enough to be in one now would probably be too stupid to get a job anyway. Hopefully.

Gauke has killed off schemes for contractors.

How does Tax Devil work?

[varunksingh]

I think a new wave of schemes and government has created a big problem for them selves. Imagine an offer like:
1) Are you contracting through umbrella?
2) Do you want a chance to get a % of tax you are paying refunded at NO COST or RISK?
All using umbrella will say yes. A smart accountant with some like Ranger's QC will make a scheme, pay HMRC upfront and fight in court. Once they win, contractors get a % of tax refunded and accountants keep the rest. Instead of making Tax legislation correct and simple, they have just messed up lot of life's and have created bigger problems for themselves down the road.

Even without above an great number of appeals in FTT will be coming their way!