Reply to: renumeration trusts

[BlasterBates]

I suggest reading the judgement on the Boyle case, paraphrasing the judges decision, if you receive some cash in your bank account as a result of being a contractor then it should be taxed as PAYE.

There was lots of stuff about foreign loans, which devalued and so on which was more or less completely ignored by the judges. The only thing that was relevant was how much was paid into his account.

Any scheme whatever it's called is going to fail.

[TheFaQQer]

Ecclestone saved a reputed £1 BILLION in tax with his deal...so in theory, he could still afford to pay out several hundred million quid on legal fees, top notch advice, etc, and still be quids in, as HMRC can't compete with that.

Us mere mortals, on the other hand...now there's a different story altogether...

I'd quite happily settle with HMRC on the same terms - I'll give you one payment equivalent to the amount I earn in interest every six weeks, and you let me off my tax bills for the rest of my life.

[captainham]

so why is it that someone like Bernie can get away with millions and I cant even hide a few notes.

Justice is just not blind

Ecclestone saved a reputed £1 BILLION in tax with his deal...so in theory, he could still afford to pay out several hundred million quid on legal fees, top notch advice, etc, and still be quids in, as HMRC can't compete with that.

Us mere mortals, on the other hand...now there's a different story altogether...

[DaveB]

Add to that the fact that Bernie's lawyers will fight HMRC every step of the way, are probably better resourced and experienced than those of HMRC and HMRC know they are a long way from a guaranteed win in the courts meaning they could spend another few years and a few million fighting the case and walk away with nothing.

The deal made was the equivalent of a bloke with a flash car paying the local kids a few quid to stop hanging around drooling over it. Here's a tenner, now **** off and stop bothering me.

[DaveB]

Because Bernie has the money to pay for top notch lawyers and tax experts who set up bespoke trusts and schemes with his specific circumstances in mind, rather than "buying" an off the shelf scheme that has the main intention of making the scheme-providers rich. Probably costs him a fortune to get things in place, but you get what you pay for.

Add to that the fact that Bernie's lawyers will fight HMRC every step of the way, are probably better resourced and experienced than those of HMRC and HMRC know they are a long way from a guaranteed win in the courts meaning they could spend another few years and a few million fighting the case and walk away with nothing.

[Clare@InTouch]

so why is it that someone like Bernie can get away with millions and I cant even hide a few notes.

Justice is just not blind

Because Bernie has the money to pay for top notch lawyers and tax experts who set up bespoke trusts and schemes with his specific circumstances in mind, rather than "buying" an off the shelf scheme that has the main intention of making the scheme-providers rich. Probably costs him a fortune to get things in place, but you get what you pay for.

[css_jay99]

These are expensive things to run, the scheme will take <15%, pay HMRC minimal tax and transfer a lot of money into your account.

You will be happy, it's minimal hassle and you'll sleep at night.

Then HMRC will come calling, it won't matter if, at the finer level of law, the scheme is effective or not -the GAAR will probably, at some point, rule it as an avoidance scheme. The fact that these schemes have been running for 20 years will not stop HMRC addressing them at some point.

HMRC will pursue you and you will pay them a lot of money. You may, one day, get your day in court - but by that point you will have lost your house.

For a flavour of what will happen, read all the posts under scheme enquiries. If anyone joins one of these schemes after reading the posts there, then they are truly , truly f***ing stupid.

so why is it that someone like Bernie can get away with millions and I cant even hide a few notes.

Justice is just not blind

[NickNick]

but then im sure my partner would sleep with george clooney for a million quid.

potentially shes a millionaire. But in reality .....

He doesn't pay that well. £10K a month is the going rate or so I'm told.
:O)

[DonkeyRhubarb]

If anyone joins one of these schemes after reading the posts there, then they are truly , truly f***ing stupid.

Yes but they could always appeal to a tribunal on the grounds of mental incompetence.

[jbryce]

Please don't

Hi guys,

I have a couple of questions, as I was looking at something called renumeration trust......

1) Is renumeration trust the same EBT?
2) Is it illegal?, if so why are companies still offering it as an efficient vehicle to reduce tax ...?
3) Is it OK if the renumeration trust is based on prior year retained earnings? rather current year profits liable to Corp Tax

Thanks

css_jay99

These are expensive things to run, the scheme will take <15%, pay HMRC minimal tax and transfer a lot of money into your account.

You will be happy, it's minimal hassle and you'll sleep at night.

Then HMRC will come calling, it won't matter if, at the finer level of law, the scheme is effective or not -the GAAR will probably, at some point, rule it as an avoidance scheme. The fact that these schemes have been running for 20 years will not stop HMRC addressing them at some point.

HMRC will pursue you and you will pay them a lot of money. You may, one day, get your day in court - but by that point you will have lost your house.

For a flavour of what will happen, read all the posts under scheme enquiries. If anyone joins one of these schemes after reading the posts there, then they are truly , truly f***ing stupid.

[tractor]

...

With all these 'investment' vehicles follow the process below to see how the saving actually works if you have the ability to do your own shoelaces without help...

Calculate the potential saving
Double the result (2 x multiplier for the fine)

This is the total saving you will make by NOT using it.

HTH.

[ASB]

As mal says, legal is a wrong word. The question simply becomes whether they are effective and achieve stated aims.

As far as I am aware there is no such vehicle as a remuneration trust. It will be a discretionary trust of some description and governed by the appropiate legislation.

it is unclear what you expect to achieve.

If paying in retained profits these have been subjected to ct. So no benefit unless trying to reclaim ct. This would be potentially available.

When paying out trust funds this is then taxable based on what they are and what legislation then applies.

so potentially there is a tax saving.

but then im sure my partner would sleep with george clooney for a million quid.

potentially shes a millionaire. But in reality .....

[malvolio]

As always, the question is not "Are they legal", since they are, but "Am I allowed to use them in this manner", which, probably, is not.

[mudskipper]

remuneration

[cojak]

I've moved the 1st post as it had no reason to be in an EBT thread.

I've kept the 2nd post as I considered it a valid response - and the link was appropriate too...