Reply to: 2019 tax charge - consultation preparation

[OG74]

Brexit

So let's hope this puts an end to the 2019 nonsense!

Of course it will and all the other problems solved in a stroke. Brilliant

[EBTContractor]

Brexit

So let's hope this puts an end to the 2019 nonsense!

[creativity]

Well I'm voting Brexit.
It's a good opportunity to show my disgust over the way the Government have handled this.

[webberg]

Does anyone know when HMRC intends to start bullying people into settling before the 2019 tax charge kicks in?

When they understand how the charge works - around Christmas perhaps at the earliest.

[EBTContractor]

Dates and timeline?

Does anyone know when HMRC intends to start bullying people into settling before the 2019 tax charge kicks in?

[DotasScandal]

One of the dangers here is that the consultation process is used to identify and plug gaps in order to "clarify" or "improve" the law. Consequently, we need to be careful here.
I started this thread and now suggest that we stop it here as for me it's given me enough.

Yes please.
In fact, it would be good if the admins could lock the thread so that we don't unknowingly give HMRC more ammunition.

[webberg]

Just as a reality check..

This proposed law hasn't even been drafted yet.
The tax obligation lies with the employer.
Transferring tax liability from an employer to employee is not as easy as HMRC would make you believe.

Given how much HMRC have c*ocked up APNs, I wouldn't be too worried. HMRC are shamefully incompetent and more importantly not above the law (despite them believing otherwise).

1. True, but we're told that it WILL be drafted and therefore attention to the detail is key
2. Not always. IN any event part of the new proposal is to examine transfer of liability from employer to employee.
3. True. Again, when you control the ability to make the law, what looks difficult becomes a mite easier?

HMRC don't write the law. They will have been consulted in what the law needs to say in order to comply with Government policy (which may have been informed to a degree by HMRC) but their is a cadre of draftsmen who actually write the law.

One of the dangers here is that the consultation process is used to identify and plug gaps in order to "clarify" or "improve" the law. Consequently, we need to be careful here.

I started this thread and now suggest that we stop it here as for me it's given me enough.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Just as a reality check..

This proposed law hasn't even been drafted yet.
The tax obligation lies with the employer.
Transferring tax liability from an employer to employee is not as easy as HMRC would make you believe.

Given how much HMRC have c*ocked up APNs, I wouldn't be too worried. HMRC are shamefully incompetent and more importantly not above the law (despite them believing otherwise).

Fair point.

Although they are also planning to change the rules to make it easier to transfer the liability.

[Whysoserious]

Just as a reality check..

This proposed law hasn't even been drafted yet.
The tax obligation lies with the employer.
Transferring tax liability from an employer to employee is not as easy as HMRC would make you believe.

Given how much HMRC have c*ocked up APNs, I wouldn't be too worried. HMRC are shamefully incompetent and more importantly not above the law (despite them believing otherwise).

[DonkeyRhubarb]

I don't know when the very first loan scheme started but, in theory, HMRC could use the 2019 charge to go back 20 years or more.

I could certainly see them writing to every single user, they've already got under investigation, and asking for details of all outstanding loans.

They might even request the information directly from the promoter if they are still around.

An awful lot of people, who think they're in the clear, for one or more years, may be in a for a very nasty surprise in 3 years time.

[DotasScandal]

if HMRC missed a year because it was too late to issue a discovery are they going to come back and claim tax on the loan for that year.

Yes.
That's one of the points of controversy (the other one being that this rule would render any judgements in favor of the taxpayers pretty much irrelevant)

[demby]

Years in Scope

Is this tax charge being aimed at years where tax years were not part of an enquiry or discovery.

if HMRC missed a year because it was too late to issue a discovery are they going to come back and claim tax on the loan for that year. Or is that year dome and dusted?

[foobar]

Leverage

The only thing I can think of is to get loads of cases to the FTT.

If the schemes are in the hands of the courts, then Parliament may not want to interfere by enacting that 2019 charge.

Shame this conversation has gone off course. Problem treatments I have seen so far on the CUK and talking to friends so far can be categorized (Ackoff):

1. Absolution (Do nothing) - We are taken to the cleaners. Complete contempt for the govt increases; Brain drain; Overall lose:lose scenario.

2. Resolution (Use past experience to solve) - FTT (expensive for everyone); Spend next 3 years becoming asset poor; Casino chips; Move country; Unionise; Spend your life running.

3. Solution (Research) - Appeal to common sense and strive to seek settlement (win:win scenario) without expensive court action.

4. Dissolution (Redesign environment so problem no longer exists) - Put a big enough bung into whatever party is in charge to change policy; Join current political party en masse and throw them out; Form our own political party;

Other ??

[foobar]

Counter to PsyOps

I'm pretty sure these guys will get themselves a nice Human Rights lawsuit in time. Mark my words.
"Nudging" is one thing, using behavioral psychology to wage PsyOps warfare on innocents is quite another. Psychological torture is a crime.

I believe HMRC PsyOps on the people could be increasingly short lived and fully negated as long as we:

1. Look at the data and examine ONLY the facts.
2. Challenge ALL assumptions even those long cherished and established ones.

[DotasScandal]

I'm unfortunately aware of a suicide directly related to enforcement of APN, not that they will care.

That's horrible to hear.
I have no doubt that HMRC will not care. But if the link is established, then it's bad news for them, cause the courts will care.