Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
If HMRC were to win the case that the loans made were income - do they by default take on the risk that if the loans were ever recalled, they, HMRC would be liable for them?
That is potentially a huge risk - several billion at least - and that's a risk on the public purse!
If you have appealed both reassessments - why then would you still transfer the quoted owed amount? is that agreeing to what HMRC are demanding whilst still appealing it?
Thanks for explaining.
FlyingIT
If you read the link, it looks as if the HMRC will hold this money until such time that you need to commit to any tax owed, they give a certificate for the amount , so what's the advantage?
The advantage is that they don't charge you interest on the disputed tax liability, should things work out for us all and the HMRC see or are told that what they are doing is grossly unfair and not legal, you can cash out your certificate and pop the money back in your own account or from where ever you had to borrow it from to start with.
They don't pay you interest on the money unless you have put in over 100k ( then its 1% I think) , but they don't charge you 3% ( I think) on the outstanding in dispute tax liability.
In my own case they have charged me 2 years interest for TAX I DO NOT AGREE I OWE , for a bill that I didn't know I had , how can that be fair?
Anyhow so the way I see this is I maybe able beg borrow and scrape what they THINK I owe (WHICH I DO NOT) send it to the CTD team to hold and not have to worry about the interest piling up for another 2 years.
Upside is that this money is held without adding interest , should the worst happen (and the legal authorities loose their mind and agree that what the HMRC is doing is legal) the money can be committed to the TAX owed at that point.
Downside is that you getting no interest on the money you have held or have to pay interest from where you got the money from to have held by the CTD,
Who knows how long this could drag on for ??? With this CTD I may be able to get a decent nights sleep, can we sue for emotional distress ????
Above is what i have gleaned from the link , however i would want to go over it a few times and make sure the HMRC do not take this money as agreement of liability and wipe it off what they think i owe, it has to be agreed that its held and not committed at this point.
Just making sure that I am sending my appeal to the right address. For 2008/2009, it was the Bedford address, but the letter for 2009/10 has the Bootle address on it. So, is it the Bootle address that this needs to be sent to?
As I said in my earlier post, I am using the same template as the 2008/09 one.
Just making sure that I am sending my appeal to the right address. For 2008/2009, it was the Bedford address, but the letter for 2009/10 has the Bootle address on it. So, is it the Bootle address that this needs to be sent to?
As I said in my earlier post, I am using the same template as the 2008/09 one.
Thanks in advance,
SKA
Send it back to where that particular letter came from. Mine was Bedford and is now Bootle. I am on Cherrylon though.
Just making sure that I am sending my appeal to the right address. For 2008/2009, it was the Bedford address, but the letter for 2009/10 has the Bootle address on it. So, is it the Bootle address that this needs to be sent to?
As I said in my earlier post, I am using the same template as the 2008/09 one.
Thanks in advance,
SKA
I sent a recorded copy to both addresses this time last week, had nothing back yet, I may ring them in a few days, they seem to be very tardy , my letter arrived 10 days after it was dated, so how nice it was to be asked to pay them a lot of money in 30 days when I only had 20.
If HMRC were to win the case that the loans made were income - do they by default take on the risk that if the loans were ever recalled, they, HMRC would be liable for them?
That is potentially a huge risk - several billion at least - and that's a risk on the public purse!
Does that also mean that they will pay pack the benefit in kind tax we all paid for said loan? I don't recall that being a credit on the itemised demand they sent me, and of course the interest payable as they have had it for 2 years ( in my case)
Clarification on the Template for Letter of Appeal against HMRC Assessment 2009-2010
Hello Everyone,
I know it has been commented by someone before, but it is not yet clear to me, as to what template to use to appeal against my assessment for 2009-2010. I was with Edge and Michelle Booth of Edge is no more working with them. Can someone share the template again for the benefit of everyone?
Secondly, does someone have details for Michelle Booth?
So, has anyone spoken to an expert in this field to guage our situation and chances of winning an appeal?
At what point should our "Group" start doing this?
Are we all in the same edge boat even? I have notices for three years -2008-11...there are some Edge former employees with notices going back to 2003? Are the notices for all years the same?
Does anyone have the contact details of Mapatui?
The trustees are obliged to act in the best interests of the employees/former employees - so should they not be defending us and their loans to us?
Our loans are still outstanding and with Mapatui and so it would be nice to hear their thoughts on all this...
No, no idea how to get hold of Mapatui but that is pretty irrelevant. You need to bear in mind that any judge will argue that you voluntarily entered into this arrangement. Nobody forced you to and they would argue that you knew you were entering into a tax avoidance scheme. Also, bear in mind that HMRC are not saying that EBT's were illegal, they are accepting that they were fully lawful so Mapatui didn't do anything wrong (and nor did we!). The trust is a trust and no more than that so it won't help speaking to them anyway.
Comment