Reply to: New Finance Bill 2017-18

[BrilloPad]

NO.

DOTAS is a scheme by scheme operation, not a firm.

There is POTAS which you may have meant?

I think I posted "registered under DOTAS"?

Anyway - DOTAS = Disclosure Of Tax Avoidance schemes? Updated in Feb 2016?
POTAS = Promoters of Tax Avoidance schemes? Feb 2015?

Aren't those enough to stop any scheme from operating?

The last one is rhetorical......

[webberg]

I have reported them to HMRC. Others have reported them to ASA and HMRC. Nothing happens. Very frustrating.

Before any company can do "schemes"(definition needed) they need to be registered. In fact, aren't they supposed to be registered under DOTAS? Where did this go wrong?

NO.

DOTAS is a scheme by scheme operation, not a firm.

There is POTAS which you may have meant?

[BrilloPad]

what amazes me is there are STILL schemes in operation.

I have reported them to HMRC. Others have reported them to ASA and HMRC. Nothing happens. Very frustrating.

Before any company can do "schemes"(definition needed) they need to be registered. In fact, aren't they supposed to be registered under DOTAS? Where did this go wrong?

[DotasScandal]

what amazes me is there are STILL schemes in operation.

See here.
https://www.dotas-scandal.org/top-10...dance-schemes/

[ConfusedEasily]

what amazes me is there are STILL schemes in operation.

[DotasScandal]

I was in both schemes, so how dumb does that make me.

Largely besides the point.
You've been set-up, mostly.

[stonehenge]

What you describe is an almost perfect replay of what happened to the double tax schemes. Between 2001 and 2008, HMRC did bugger all, which allowed the schemes to proliferate. In the end they got HMG to dig them out of the hole with retrospective legislation.

It was a bit naive to think the same thing couldn't happen again. I can't understand why this didn't ring more alarm bells.

I was in both schemes, so how dumb does that make me.

[washed up contractor]

What you describe is an almost perfect replay of what happened to the double tax schemes. Between 2001 and 2008, HMRC did bugger all, which allowed the schemes to proliferate. In the end they got HMG to dig them out of the hole with retrospective legislation.

It was a bit naive to think the same thing couldn't happen again. I can't understand why this didn't ring more alarm bells.

You have only got to see muppets asking 'can I claim flights to Aus for me and the wife (we both contract) if I go for an interview.....' to see the mindset of many contractors.

The whole problem is exacerbated by HMRC taking too long to close these schemes down. They instead engage in years and years of doing sweet FA before finally sending APN \ FNs to people. I swear it must be part of HMRC's MO to let things drag out for a minimum 5 years then arse rape contractors and others for the 'disputed tax' and interest.

The dozy twats have taken so long in some instances that they have found themselves out of time to collect NICs and once again, are asking MPs to bail them out of the tulip by amending the relevant legislation so they win again.

When are people going to wise up to the crooks running HMRC?

[DotasScandal]

It was a bit naive to think the same thing couldn't happen again. I can't understand why this didn't ring more alarm bells.

Why, pray tell, did you think it couldn't happen again?
Serious question. Obviously, contractors as a group learnt nothing from that debacle, and continued in their selfish, "I'm all right Jack" ways. Therefore it would have been extremely surprising if HMRC did NOT try a replay of shenanigans that worked beyond all expectations the first time around.

[ns1]

• HMRC who did nothing for years.
• The promoters who oversold and promised QC and HMRC compliance when one was shakey and the other never existed.
• Accountants who recommended the schemes to clients as a means of legally avoiding IR35.
• And us - we took the schemes, albeit in good faith.
• HMG who see a means of gaining a fast buck at the expense of a lot of people's lives and careers.

What you describe is an almost perfect replay of what happened to the double tax schemes. Between 2001 and 2008, HMRC did bugger all, which allowed the schemes to proliferate. In the end they got HMG to dig them out of the hole with retrospective legislation.

It was a bit naive to think the same thing couldn't happen again. I can't understand why this didn't ring more alarm bells.

[jbryce]

So Saleos people like you who generated and sold these sort of schemes to 10000s of contractors. I myself is in this sh**t for over 10 years now and have 5 open years which so far settled two of the years. It cost me over 100K so far and a divorce with two kids.
You better update your website and be honest with people that non of these schemes will work if investigated by HMRC. You can close the shop and disappear like other scheme promoters when it comes to investigation but be honest with us as we (I) have lost all my life on this.

Matt has updated his site "No longer active in the promotion of aggressive tax mitigation strategies Matt can offer advice on pragmatic, non-contentious 
tax planning".

In fairness to Matt - he is still around which is more than can be said for most. He was also honest to come on the forum and set his views out.

Lots of people are complicit in all of this.

• HMRC who did nothing for years.
• The promoters who oversold and promised QC and HMRC compliance when one was shakey and the other never existed.
• Accountants who recommended the schemes to clients as a means of legally avoiding IR35.
• And us - we took the schemes, albeit in good faith.
• HMG who see a means of gaining a fast buck at the expense of a lot of people's lives and careers.

I think I read on this forum that there have been suicides over this. There will be more.

It's a shame, there was a deal to be had here which recognised the failings of all.

[Safe]

So Saleos people like you who generated and sold these sort of schemes to 10000s of contractors. I myself is in this sh**t for over 10 years now and have 5 open years which so far settled two of the years. It cost me over 100K so far and a divorce with two kids.
You better update your website and be honest with people that non of these schemes will work if investigated by HMRC. You can close the shop and disappear like other scheme promoters when it comes to investigation but be honest with us as we (I) have lost all my life on this.

If you’re so confident of your facts share your name and address and we can find out. Or are you a coward as well as a troll?

The tax you’ll pay is because of a tax charge created several years after I was involved. The schemes I was involved in wouldn’t have led to you paying a penny of tax were it not for the 5.4.19 charge. And if you think anyone could have foreseen that then there’s clearly no rationalising with you.

And turning to your points.

The backer of 1 scheme (over 10 years ago) lives in Australia. Out of 6 schemes I deal with. How is that remotely relevant? And I’m not emigrating. (Stalker!).

CTA = 6 exams in 2 years - 6 more than you. And most accountants (the majority of whom fail the CTA exams). And before that 6 more papers and 2 years doing ATT exams to be allowed to sit CTA. And I’d worked in tax for 10years before qualifying. How many professional qualifications in this field do you hold?

I didn’t charge users a fee for support. And I didn’t have to agree to help the thousands of contractors I do now, mostly in schemes I had absolutely nothing to do it with. And I charge much less for that than I could or should have and wish I’d never bothered (like most others).

I don’t offer the schemes on the website set up over 4 years ago and not touched since. Nor does it even say GAAR proof.

So supply your name and address and we will can give everyone a good read. Unless you’re just full of tulip.

[DeadDOTAS]

Quoting verbatim from the following website: Saleos

"No longer active in the promotion of aggressive tax mitigation strategies Matt can offer advice on pragmatic, non-contentious 
tax planning suitable for the world in which we now live. Options include our Education Costs Planning and Capital Extraction Plan."

Unless I am stupid and/or dumb, that would suggest that PREVIOUSLY you have been active in the promotion of aggressive tax mitigation strategies - or not? At least you're honest, Matt, got to give you that!!!

[jbryce]

Hi Matt....

Based on the contents of your website and the contents of messages posted on this site by others and content on other social media outlets, I considered my comments to be based on a reasonable opinion. They were not meant to be defamatory.

As you chose to directly respond to the posts on CUK I corrected my comments to reflect your replies. I feel that this is a healthy discourse that has allowed me to address any, unintended, inaccuracies. I am glad that you chose to respond directly to allow us to correspond in an open forum.

The law,as it stands, reflects the Government’s view that disputes should be resolved
directly between the complainant and the poster where possible. As we are doing here.

As I choose to remain hidden, you are entitled to ask CUK to remove the post(s) which they should do within 48 hours.

[jbryce]

The tax you’ll pay is because of a tax charge created several years after I was involved. The schemes I was involved in wouldn’t have led to you paying a penny of tax were it not for the 5.4.19 charge. And if you think anyone could have foreseen that then there’s clearly no rationalising with you.

were it not for the 5.4.19 charge.
Oh duh - so these tax avoidance schemes were bomb proof? In which case I withdraw the allegation that you were ever involved in any schemes that have failed.

If it wasn't for the pesky kids, Osbourne and Cameron, we'd've got away with it!

CTA = 6 exams in 2 years - 6 more than you. And most accountants (the majority of whom fail the CTA exams). And before that 6 more papers and 2 years doing ATT exams to be allowed to sit CTA. And I’d worked in tax for 10years before qualifying. How many professional qualifications in this field do you hold?

No need to get touchy. My point is that nothing you offer is in any way shape or form regulated.
Which is ok.
I have no qualifications in Tax which is why I, and others, relied on you to be our guide.

I didn’t charge users a fee for support. And I didn’t have to agree to help the thousands of contractors I do now, mostly in schemes I had absolutely nothing to do it with.

Hang on - I thought you had nothing to do with the schemes?
If you don't charge a penny to support users of schemes then I must, of course, apologise and withdraw any unintended suggestion that you do charge.

I don’t offer the schemes on the website set up over 4 years ago and not touched since. Nor does it even say GAAR proof.

Oh right - you don't offer those schemes anymore? Just once upon a time?. Your website is just four years out of date. Sorry - you can see how one could have assumed that your website was representative of your recent offerings.
f96cea2417621a533bbb0d3b8ff4f201
I did qualify the GAAR proof - and I'm sorry for misinterpreting your web site. What your site actually says is

It is not aggressive, not disclosable under the DoTAS regime, and unaffected by the General Anti-Abuse Rule.


Was it QC approved as well?

The backer of 1 scheme (over 10 years ago) lives in Australia. Out of 6 schemes I deal with. How is that remotely relevant? And I’m not emigrating. (Stalker!).

Are you not emigrating? Are you coming back?
My apologies for suggesting that you were emigrating, however, I, and many others, interpreted your twitter feed as you moving to Australia.
The UK needs its finest minds so I'm glad you're staying.

So supply your name and address and we will can give everyone a good read. Unless you’re just full of tulip.

But I think I've withdrawn all my allegations and just replied to your words? Which are:

...The schemes I was involved in wouldn’t have led to you paying a penny of tax were it not for the 5.4.19 charge.
...mostly in schemes I had absolutely nothing to do it with.
...I don’t offer the schemes on the website set up over 4 years ago and not touched since.

That ok?