The impact of APNs on Tribunal hearings

[webberg]

An APN is issued for tax in DISPUTE.

Any Judge with common sense will see that having a disputed liability is why the case ends up in Court and that the APN is just a mechanism for who holds the stakes in the poker game.

[DotasScandal]

At the very least if you 'win' in the tribunal as least you can say that it is basic extortion of your hard earnt money and I wasn't as stupid and naive as I feel at the moment.

Don't need a tribunal 'win' to recognize basic extortion when you see it. If you've seen it once before, you'll recognize it without a doubt.

If you feel stupid/naive, it's just a sign that you are temporarily forgetting than hindsight is always 20/20. What may appear native from the perspective of 2015 was perfectly rational from that of 2005. Despite everything that HMRC and their little minions Behavioural Insights Ltd would have you believe.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Btw, to answer your original question...

I can't see the issuing of APNs having any bearing on a tribunal.

[difficulttimes]

Definitely don't agree it's pointless. If the tribunals say it's not disguised remuneration then how could that same loan become part of a policy thats headed 'disguised remuneration'. I really can't get my head around that and I really don't want to speak about it again as its gone too many rounds on CUK forum.

At the very least if you 'win' in the tribunal as least you can say that it is basic extortion of your hard earnt money and I wasn't as stupid and naive as I feel at the moment.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

I can only speak on behalf of what I was involved in and that is definitely still going ahead to tribunal. It will not be until 2017 sometime. You may be surprised by how many are still going through to a tribunal hearing.

Yes I am surprised, given how many promoters seem to have legged it.

Some will say it's pointless given DRLC. That any victory would be pyrrhic. But I don't entirely agree.

[difficulttimes]

I can only speak on behalf of what I was involved in and that is definitely still going ahead to tribunal. It will not be until 2017 sometime. You may be surprised by how many are still going through to a tribunal hearing.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

(DRLC = 2019 Disguised Remuneration Loan Charge)

Personally, I can't see many contractor loan schemes ever ending up at tribunal.

1) HMRC aren't going to be proactive in taking cases forward (why would they when they're getting DRLC)

2) Most promoters seem to have disappeared, so there is no-one to take a case on behalf of the users. (Besides which, promoters are generally reactive and wait for HMRC to make the first move.)

3) Anyone, who was contemplating an appeal, may think twice in light of DRLC

[QCApproved]

Let this be heard by the judiciary and not just the executive and let's hear their opinions on this debacle, its origins and and the way it has been handled and what the equitable resolution might be.

Let's see what actually crystallises into statute, what it covers and what causes of action may become available. it's certainly not clear at this time what is planned for schemes that did not involve the offshore employer or loans.

The tribunal actions must continue.

[DotasScandal]

Possibly most of the schemes did work but the opportunity to defend has now been removed.

It hasn't been removed. Until this becomes actual law, it's all smoke, mirrors, and psychological operations to make you lay down your guns.

[horrada]

Morning everyone

I am interested to hear what everyone's thoughts are on what if any impact the APNs may have on future tribunal hearings. I know that they may now be academic but I for one and I'm sure many others would like to know whether the scheme we were in was operating legally.
My concern is that the tribunal judges (or whatever you call them) may take the view that HMRC must have a water tight case against this scheme to issue an APN which may sway their judgement in favour of HMRC. Of course the reality is far from that - if you have a DOTAS number you essentially get an APN even if they don't really know what the disputable tax amount is.
It does feel like the world is against us at the moment and the goal posts keep on moving but wondering what everyone's views are on whether APNs may have a further adverse impact on future litigation cases or maybe they could work in our favour?? Also many of these cases will come after this proposed legislation becomes law so that may also sway them that they are going to be taxed anyway so why should my judgement be any different.

Overall it does feel at the moment that HMRC are winning everything when it comes to tax avoidance cases so I do wonder if tribunal judges have also bought into the rhetoric which they are successfully spinning.

All sounds very negative...sorry guys..

Personally I do not think HMRC are winning anything. They are just cheats and changing any law retrospectively is not fair game. They have lost and are bad losers in my opinion.

Possibly most of the schemes did work but the opportunity to defend has now been removed.

[difficulttimes]

Morning everyone

I am interested to hear what everyone's thoughts are on what if any impact the APNs may have on future tribunal hearings. I know that they may now be academic but I for one and I'm sure many others would like to know whether the scheme we were in was operating legally.
My concern is that the tribunal judges (or whatever you call them) may take the view that HMRC must have a water tight case against this scheme to issue an APN which may sway their judgement in favour of HMRC. Of course the reality is far from that - if you have a DOTAS number you essentially get an APN even if they don't really know what the disputable tax amount is.
It does feel like the world is against us at the moment and the goal posts keep on moving but wondering what everyone's views are on whether APNs may have a further adverse impact on future litigation cases or maybe they could work in our favour?? Also many of these cases will come after this proposed legislation becomes law so that may also sway them that they are going to be taxed anyway so why should my judgement be any different.

Overall it does feel at the moment that HMRC are winning everything when it comes to tax avoidance cases so I do wonder if tribunal judges have also bought into the rhetoric which they are successfully spinning.

All sounds very negative...sorry guys..