Reply to: Today's Budget

[webberg]

I assume you're being paid by the government.
How about you go and Foxtrot Oscar, being a speck of a useless spunk trumpet.

what he said.

[flamel]

Anyone who took one of these loans knew what they were doing. It wasn't wise planning it was just evasion.

So why the righteous indignation? You took a punt, tried to pay no taxes, it didn't work.

I can't honestly believe that anyone entered into one of these and didn't give themselves a sly chuckle at how smart they were getting one over on the man.

I assume you're being paid by the government.
How about you go and Foxtrot Oscar, being a speck of a useless spunk trumpet.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

I'll leave it to others to say what it makes you.

perhaps?

[webberg]

Anyone who took one of these loans knew what they were doing. It wasn't wise planning it was just evasion.

So why the righteous indignation? You took a punt, tried to pay no taxes, it didn't work.

I can't honestly believe that anyone entered into one of these and didn't give themselves a sly chuckle at how smart they were getting one over on the man.

Being generous, the above is a naive view. Being less generous, if you had bothered reading the threads for more than 30 seconds, you would realise that your view is hopelessly ill informed.

I think everybody here realises that when hindsight is applied they have allowed themselves to be fooled into something inappropriate.

(OK, I accept that some may have taken a punt, but I can honestly say that they represent less than 1% of the people I speak with).

Coming in with smug comments protected by anonymity of a forum name does not make you a philosopher or keeper of the moral high ground. I'll leave it to others to say what it makes you.

[BrilloPad]

Anyone who took one of these loans knew what they were doing. It wasn't wise planning it was just evasion.

So why the righteous indignation? You took a punt, tried to pay no taxes, it didn't work.

I can't honestly believe that anyone entered into one of these and didn't give themselves a sly chuckle at how smart they were getting one over on the man.

Anger is justified. At a tedious twunt like you. Wait until the same happens to you.

Why not turn up at the next CUK meeting and make your comments face to face?

[DotasScandal]

Go and do one...you have no clue of individuals circumstances of why they ended up where they did.
What a righteous idiot!

Just the usual HMRC observer who couldn't hold it in anymore. Ignore.

[LandRover]

Anyone who took one of these loans knew what they were doing. It wasn't wise planning it was just evasion.

So why the righteous indignation? You took a punt, tried to pay no taxes, it didn't work.

I can't honestly believe that anyone entered into one of these and didn't give themselves a sly chuckle at how smart they were getting one over on the man.

Go and do one...you have no clue of individuals circumstances of why they ended up where they did.

What a righteous idiot!

[DonkeyRhubarb]

That's probably exactly what you will hear from someone else in a year or two, when HMRC/HMG will start to retrospectively punish the use of LTD companies by contractors.

It's funny, recent articles in the press have described use of a personal LTD with terms like "loophole" and "scheme".

It's less aggressive than the marketed schemes but it's still regarded by the authorities as tax avoidance.

IR35 was anti-avoidance legislation after all.

[SomeDude]

Anyone who took one of these loans knew what they were doing. It wasn't wise planning it was just evasion.

So why the righteous indignation? You took a punt, tried to pay no taxes, it didn't work.

I can't honestly believe that anyone entered into one of these and didn't give themselves a sly chuckle at how smart they were getting one over on the man.

That's probably exactly what you will hear from someone else in a year or two, when HMRC/HMG will start to retrospectively punish the use of LTD companies by contractors.

[PeterF]

So does the above in effect over-ride the discovery windows of 4/6 years - can the "charge" (plus interest presumably) be levied on loans where no enquiry has been raised?

It looks like HMRC have picked an arbitrary (although highly tactical) date to cut through annoying "out of time" constraints. Is that the case?

Initially looks that way I'd say. Any years previously out of HMRC's reach due to being out of time for enquiry or assessment, potentially forget all that - a nice retro sweep back to year dot.

[dmc]

Is anger justified?

Anyone who took one of these loans knew what they were doing. It wasn't wise planning it was just evasion.

So why the righteous indignation? You took a punt, tried to pay no taxes, it didn't work.

I can't honestly believe that anyone entered into one of these and didn't give themselves a sly chuckle at how smart they were getting one over on the man.

[Mojito]

Over-rides the 4/6-year discovery windows?

10.The charge will apply where:
a. The loan was made at any time prior to the amendments to Part 7A, outlined in Chapter 4, coming into force (including where the loan was made before Part 7A was first introduced);
b. If the same loan was made after those amendments came into force it would be taxable under Part 7A (including if it would already have been taxable under Part 7A if made before it was amended); and
c. The loan, or part of the loan, is outstanding on 5 April 2019.

So does the above in effect over-ride the discovery windows of 4/6 years - can the "charge" (plus interest presumably) be levied on loans where no enquiry has been raised?

It looks like HMRC have picked an arbitrary (although highly tactical) date to cut through annoying "out of time" constraints. Is that the case?

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Tax charge on loans

The timing of when the charge comes into effect, 5 April 2019, is no accident.

This is during the final year of this Parliament, before the May 2020 election, when the Govt has set itself the target of having a budget surplus.

A big windfall tax like this would be very convenient in that year.

[webberg]

If an agency is responsible for determining your status AND drawing up your contract, presumably they could be persuaded to word the contract in such a way that you are able to be declared outside IR35? Otherwise they might find it much harder to find contractors willing to take on PS roles. I look forward with trepidation to the next round of consultation on what HMRC considers to be business rules.

I suspect that said agency will have to show that they have used the HMRC supplied digital tool and the answers it returns.

Suffice to say that my firm has a number of clients (more than a few dozen) to whom we supply services and we used a similar tool which returned a "borderline" result for us!

I think it safe to conclude that 90% or more tests will come back as "employee".

[carling]

Just when you thought the Gangsters couldnt stoop any lower.