Edge EBT thread

[Saleos]

Wishful thinking

Edge has been exported off the Isle of Man. I believe to Panama. If you think that the action of a business willing to step in and help, fund the defence, or even provide information, you are sir an eternal optimist!

Yea I read that but I'm sorry I can't see how a lawyer can step in and provide you with information asked of you at the detailed enquiry assessment request. Only the loan provider have the knowledge of the complexity of the loan arrangement and how various bits is strung together. That is why I'm of the opinion that the lawyers cannot replace he loan provider in this instance.

Lawyers will obviously have role to play further down the line but not at the detailed enquiry assessment request stage. This should be for the loan provider

[Saleos]

As yet there is no detail on this. There is no draft legislation on it in the draft 2014 Finance Bill published last week and it is subject to consultation. I understand more will be published on this in January but I know of one senior QC who largely acts for HMRC who thinks it unworkable for First Tier Tribunal decisions at least (because they are not binding on anyone, a point those speculating about Boyle, irrespective of how it can in any event be distinguished on its facts, miss).

I think this will be dealt with in next years Finance Bill. The following was announced on 5 December 2013:
"Follower Penalties: users of failed avoidance schemes - This measure will introduce a new obligation for users of an avoidance scheme that HMRC have defeated in a tribunal or court hearing in another party’s litigation, to concede their position to reflect that decision. When there has been a relevant decision HMRC will issue a notice to all users of the scheme in question requiring them to amend their return or advise HMRC why they believe they should not. A tax-geared penalty would be charged if they failed to amend their return and it was subsequently found that the avoidance scheme they used failed on the same point of law. Taxpayers will be able to appeal against the penalty.
Accelerated tax payment in avoidance cases - Legislation will be included in Finance Bill 2014 to require payment of the tax in dispute in a tax avoidance enquiry when an ‘avoidance follower penalty notice’ is issued. This will take effect from Royal Assent which is expected mid July 2014.
At present taxpayers (in most cases) can hold on to the disputed tax while the dispute is being investigated. This can take a number of years, and there is evidence that some taxpayers enter into avoidance schemes primarily for the cash flow benefit. "

[Saleos]

Boyle

It would be a waste of money supporting Boyle in my view.

It was appallingly implemented (to the point where I'd suggest it was no more than a sham) and with the Tribunal having found as a fact (para 104, 105) that the loans were written off (and hence were taxable under s188 ITEPA 2003) it is difficult to see how an appeal could succeed. An appeal can be made generally only on a point of law, not a finding of fact. It'd be a waste of money trying. Better to distinguish and to rely upon other, more analogous, cases elsewhere.

Boyle did not present a single decent argument against the application of the ToAA legislation so it sheds little light on the potential application of those rules (which HMRC will certainly seek to invoke on Edge employees). I can, but won't on this forum, name at least three good arguments against its application, all supported by the opinion of leading QC's, none of which saw the light of day in Boyle. Which says much about what defending tax avoidance arrangements on a shoe string budget gets you I'm afraid.

Boyle is a lame duck, floating in the pond with it's @rse in the air imo.

But you pays your money and takes your choices!

Can you please elaborate
1) Why all should support Boyle case? What are the benefits?
2) Why law in particular was clarified for during the years of operation of Edge?

[Saleos]

Perhaps you'd like to read my proposal before commenting Bigdug?!

I used to advise [so NOT looking for clients] on EBT's and have followed the threads for some time. A few obvious pointers:
YES - you need a group BUT
A/ I am not sure that the money handed to Saleos will be used in the correct priority . (Plus unfortunately I do believe that there is a certain amount of unwarranted fear factor being used by Saleos to attract business. I fear that your £750 will not go far and the next request for funds will be a large one ).
B/ Cant comment on DANDY approach other than what has been said 3rd hand re using a "savvy tax barrister for assistance / an opinion". Frankly this is not a sensible way forward UNLESS you know the exact A to Z of how the scheme actually operated. (Virtually all EBT's worked on QC "paper" - including depreciating currency loans). PLUS the outcome of the Rangers or any other EBT case/appeal does not matter if the EDGE scheme was NOT properly implemented.
C/ SO does anyone know song and verse how EDGE and the Trust actually operated. E. G. If EDGE have disappeared - who is paying the annual fees of the Trust. Is the Trust still in existence (it is up to the taxpayer to produce this information and a good Trust/Trustee witness to give evidewnce in Court) - if it is NO longer around THEN you can virtually say goodbye to any chance of winning - HMRC will argue Loans written off which is a taxable event.
D/ If you received loans from EBT then you were also a beneficiary of the Trust. You have rights of access to certain information from the Trustee..
D/ Before pouring money down the drain you also have to look at some very obvious practical issues that arose from the November 2013 Philip Boyle EBT tribunal case. Although the Philip Boyle EBT case is different in many ways (i.e. it supposedly used depreciating currency loans) there are many features that show how difficult a task you face UNLESS you get some support (NOT financial) from EDGE and the EDGE TRUST. E. G.
1/ Philip Boyle was a member of the Consulting Overseas EBT scheme which was so badly implemented it could have been argued that it was fraudulent (on the part of the scheme operator/implementor). Consulting Overseas refused to supply any evidence of what happened in the Isle of Man or what transactions were undertaken by the Trust SO the Tribunal had to come to its own conclusions based on other evidence available . SO the Consulting Overseas fiasco will strengthen HMRC's view that most contractor EBT's were set up/implemented on the cheap and are vulnerable.
2/ NB Question - Did QC say it was ok for Edge to circulate a brochure/starter pack that stated from the outset what your overall return/take home pay was and other material/emails that does not need much interpretation/reading between lines - this point certainly went against the Consulting Overseas scheme. A NORLA [mod snip - no guessing here please] client very recently posted on this forum about re-reading his sales brochure - HMRC will already be aware of this !!
3/ Whoever is the representative Client (if I were HMRC I would go with at least 3 ) they have to be prepared to go into the "dock" under oath and say that they "expected to repay the loans in full" despite the sales brochure referring to the 86% "take home pay" payable as soon as the agency funds hit the bank.
4/ the tribunal Judge was NOT impressed with Philip Boyle and fell short of calling him a liar BUT in lawyer speak the Judge was as close as can be without using the word.

SO - UNLESS you know song and verse on how the EBT operated it will be difficult to defend. E.G. Rangers FC [Murray Group] success at the first tier tax tribunal was - to some extent - because the company that settled the Trust and the Trustee both gave evidence before the tribunal as to how scheme actually operated. NEITHER did it need to circulate SALES brochures on the internet/ in the post to all and sundry.

FINALLY good EBT schemes can be defended AND you need to get to bottom of whether EDGE was good insofar as its implementation AND what does the QC think of the SALES brochure - which was an act of !!!!!!!!!!! on the part of the scheme implementer.

[Saleos]

Saleos - Over and Out

Having had my fill of the various musings on this site I am going to log off for good tonight.

To those of you that have PM'd me and provided me with their email address to which I have sent my proposal, thank you. I hope that you have found my proposal of interest and I look forward to working with you should you wish.

I remain willing to help and optimistic that enough will want my support to make it worthwhile.

If you wish to receive my proposal please email me at matthall at saleosconsultancy.co.uk. I would be happy to share it with you so that you may make an informed decision rather than rely upon conjecture on here. I will not though provide free advice or engage in endless debate about the various approaches discussed on here.

To everyone else, I wish you luck. And remind you that you should assume that HMRC see everything posted on this forum.

[K12AN]

Mapatui Limited are still running:
MAPATUI LIMITED :: OpenCorporates

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Yea I read that but I'm sorry I can't see how a lawyer can step in and provide you with information asked of you at the detailed enquiry assessment request. Only the loan provider have the knowledge of the complexity of the loan arrangement and how various bits is strung together. That is why I'm of the opinion that the lawyers cannot replace he loan provider in this instance.

Lawyers will obviously have role to play further down the line but not at the detailed enquiry assessment request stage. This should be for the loan provider

We'll have to disagree about that. I believe a suitably knowledgeable tax advisor would be more than capable of representing people who used the Edge scheme.

I can totally understand why people are reticent about shelling out for advice. You all paid Edge substantial fees and by all rights they should be defending you free of charge. You shouldn't have to be dipping into your own pockets. I would be absolutely livid if I was in your position.

But ultimately you don't have many other options. Joining a group, under one advisor, is the cheapest way to get representation.

[varunksingh]

It would be a waste of money supporting Boyle in my view.

It was appallingly implemented (to the point where I'd suggest it was no more than a sham) and with the Tribunal having found as a fact (para 104, 105) that the loans were written off (and hence were taxable under s188 ITEPA 2003) it is difficult to see how an appeal could succeed. An appeal can be made generally only on a point of law, not a finding of fact. It'd be a waste of money trying. Better to distinguish and to rely upon other, more analogous, cases elsewhere.

Boyle did not present a single decent argument against the application of the ToAA legislation so it sheds little light on the potential application of those rules (which HMRC will certainly seek to invoke on Edge employees). I can, but won't on this forum, name at least three good arguments against its application, all supported by the opinion of leading QC's, none of which saw the light of day in Boyle. Which says much about what defending tax avoidance arrangements on a shoe string budget gets you I'm afraid.

Boyle is a lame duck, floating in the pond with it's @rse in the air imo.

But you pays your money and takes your choices!

I had thought the same. Read Boyle's decision again today after reading Michael's post and still could'nt find anything which made me think we should club together and support Boyles. Lets see what Michael replies with

[DonkeyRhubarb]

I had thought the same. Read Boyle's decision again today after reading Michael's post and still could'nt find anything which made me think we should club together and support Boyles. Lets see what Michael replies with

The only reason to support Boyle would be if that case set a total precedent that prevented you having your own day in court (FTT). I don't see that for one minute.

IMO, it's far better to put 100% of your resources into fighting your own case.

[ammark]

Please also PM me

Hello

I have also received HMRC assessments for 2008-2009 and 2009-2010. Admin could you please PM me too. I believe "PM" mean I will get the proposals from Dandy and Saleos?

Could you please confirm once done?

I am also willing to participate in the groups being setup and would like to see their proposals.

Thanks
Ammar