Reply to: Rangers Tax Case Supreme Court 15 & 16 March

[webberg]

A loan can be a payment for tax purposes.

That same loan can be an IHT asset/liability for tax purposes.

That same loan can have legal obligations and rights that the parties must adhere to.

A decision in Murray that the loans are income or that the loans are loans will not bring any clarity to this position.

Certainly I think HMRC has at best a position that is inconsistent and illogical here and I think some advisers are no better. My own opinion has gaps that I find troubling and which I'm hoping Murray will help to fill in.

It looks as though the decision will not be out before the end of the tax year (strategic?) but hopefully will not be too long.

[SimonJones]

What he said.

If HMRC lose, then pre 2011 they say ToAA gets you and post 2011, they say Part 7A gets you.

What's more interesting is if they win, the employer is primarily liable for tax deductions.

Why then are they not chasing more employers?

(We have seen a very few Reg 80 - PAYE assessments - issued very recently. Whilst one swallow does not make a summer perhaps the penny is dropping?)

Should HMRC win, than the tax liability falls on the employer, than what happens with these loans... how are they than treated?

[Invisiblehand]

I think we all know who will decide to run it...

[cojak]

Disagree, this is the one catch all piece of legislation where we can all join together as it isn't scheme specific, will be cheap as chips!

I think that they are suggesting that you should organise it.

[Dylan]

Explain?

Go on, as you know so much more than I do about my own circumstances, group memberships, ongoing and future litigation plans, you can explain to me why my head is in the sand. Am looking forward to it.

[flamel]

I'm not a member of BG, it doesn't give me anything at all but don't have my head in the sand.

[webberg]

The point remains that there is no action group fairy and bringing one together is an exercise in frustration.

Some of the issues I've mentioned before.

Here though the first opportunity for some legal challenge is likely to be July/August when the Finance Bill becomes the Finance Act.

A 3 month window to get organised and collect the first contributions takes us to June.

If this is to happen, then volunteers are needed NOW

[Dylan]

Like little children, contractors think these things happen magically.
There is never any shortage of "we should/we must" advice on these boards and offline. Contractors at large are always full of good will...to cheer from the sidelines as someone else does all the work and take all the blows. Contractors love a free ride. But lifting a finger and actually doing something tangible that involves investing time and money? Forget it!

Aimed at?

[JPB]

Contact

Hi, new to this site so don't really know how to use yet. How can I pm Webberg as I've a question to ask but don't want to post it on this site
Thanks

[sbar99920]

hopeful

Well, hopefully there will be enough of us to make it work.

[DotasScandal]

This legislation will no doubt bankrupt me and force me to move abroad, as with many others. Given that the solutions that I used from 2011 to 2015 where compliant with tax law at the time, this retrospective law must be deemed unlawful.

We've been on this merry-go-round twice already... with APNs, and with S58 before that. So allow us to be a tad jaded.
You will soon find that for one contractor ready to "do something", you have 1000 peers who are nothing more than lazy, selfish, complacent slugs. That, my friend, is just the character of the UK contractor.

[sbar99920]

volunteers

Given the gravity of the situation I am sure that there are a lot of contractors who would get involved. Not that I have any great expertise that would be useful, but I would certainly give of my time where needed. This legislation will no doubt bankrupt me and force me to move abroad, as with many others. Given that the solutions that I used from 2011 to 2015 where compliant with tax law at the time, this retrospective law must be deemed unlawful.

[DotasScandal]

Like little children, contractors think these things happen magically.
There is never any shortage of "we should/we must" advice on these boards and offline. Contractors at large are always full of good will...to cheer from the sidelines as someone else does all the work and take all the blows. Contractors love a free ride. But lifting a finger and actually doing something tangible that involves investing time and money? Forget it!

[webberg]

No.

I'm not a member of BG, it doesn't give me anything at all but don't have my head in the sand.

For the 2019 JR all the groups (inc BG) can band together.

Why would the groups band together?

There seems to be little coherence in the strategy of the various groups of contractors at the moment and some of the promoters seem to have woken up at the prospect of selling product to avoid the 2019 charge but little else.

We are looking at bringing together a group at the level of the legal advisers. That has its own challenges (who is instructing and who is the client?) However ideally a group now of say 5,000 paying £20 a month each and planning a legal challenge around mid 2019 - that's a couple of million and a good start.

So who holds that money?
Who controls the bank account?
Who does the admin?
Who maintains the website?
Who does the membership sign ups?
How much should be spent on admin?

Volunteers?

Subject to solving some issues around holding client money (expensive process), Big Group when it reopens may be interested in expanding its admin service to such a group, but we're still thinking about it.

[Dylan]

Sounds like you're talking about BIG Group which already exists, a group where everyone joins together (except those who have stuck their head in the sand) and isn't scheme specific.

No.

I'm not a member of BG, it doesn't give me anything at all but don't have my head in the sand.

For the 2019 JR all the groups (inc BG) can band together.