Reply to: Loan Charge stories in the FT

[GreenMirror]

Horrific stories. I was lucky enough to have only been with one of these Umbrella companies for seven months so my liability was low. I left them as soon as I learned about this loan charge and I'm now permanent at my workplace. I have recently received two texts asking me to rejoin the umbrella company and offering me a loyalty bonus !

This is just plain wrong. Why are these companies not being targetted ? An utter disgrace.

Hopefully the APPG will be asking this. Along with why HMRC waited since 1999 to ban the schemes. And why it is okay for HMRC to be able to bully people who allegedly owe them money.

[Culps67]

Not sure if it’s appropriate (mods, feel free to delete if it is not) but there’s an article in today’s FT humanising the aspect of the loan charges with various real stories.

Readers respond to ‘Living in the shadow of a tax scandal’ | Financial Times

Horrific stories. I was lucky enough to have only been with one of these Umbrella companies for seven months so my liability was low. I left them as soon as I learned about this loan charge and I'm now permanent at my workplace. I have recently received two texts asking me to rejoin the umbrella company and offering me a loyalty bonus !

This is just plain wrong. Why are these companies not being targetted ? An utter disgrace.

[GreenMirror]

Its worth sending any of this evidence to the APPG where you were 'persuaded' to go into a scheme or how normal it was.
In particular the point being that yes laws change and they should but there was no real justification for this being made retrospective.

Details on how to submit here and structure required
APPG Inquiry - Loan Charge APPG

Some papers are on the case too following this FT article and want your impact statement too (the same one is fine)
[email protected]
[email protected]

This is your chance to get this stopped as we seem to have hit a bit of a critical mass in the media and with EDM/APPG and HMRC on the back foot. If there is a time for MP action to stop it, it is NOW. Give @LCAG_2019 and @loanchargeAPPG all the help you can please.

Personally I am NOT going to settle and I would love it if other people didn't either as will certainly make life harder for HMRC.
I know AML has dropped the JR (timing of times article and criticism seems connected) and HMRC are going to try to rush APNs out as fast as possible before the review but worth resisting (imho) till then. There is a case for APPG delaying APNs while the review takes place.
Settling makes little difference in my calc (so it is easier for me) but I had to confess before for the DTA scheme and I'm not confessing and accepting a lie and years of bending over so they can bleed me dry with no come back just to make their spiteful vendetta easier.

While I'm campaigning :-) probably worth signing this too to stop Mel Stride lying to the public.
Make it a criminal offence for MPs to deliberately mislead the general public. - Petitions.
It appears that one of these was done last year but no impact.
Make it illegal for any UK politician to lie or mislead the public. - Petitions
Not sure if there's now a parilamentary conduct board this could be referred to?

Apologies if I have broken some forum posting rule here but I am unconnected with any of these groups other than supporting them and thinking they are our best chance at some justice

Phil wrote the original review for Ed Davey. Good to see how far this has come thanks to his efforts! Well done Phil!

[QUODM]

send your evidence to the appg

Its worth sending any of this evidence to the APPG where you were 'persuaded' to go into a scheme or how normal it was.
In particular the point being that yes laws change and they should but there was no real justification for this being made retrospective.

Details on how to submit here and structure required
APPG Inquiry - Loan Charge APPG

Some papers are on the case too following this FT article and want your impact statement too (the same one is fine)
[email protected]
[email protected]

This is your chance to get this stopped as we seem to have hit a bit of a critical mass in the media and with EDM/APPG and HMRC on the back foot. If there is a time for MP action to stop it, it is NOW. Give @LCAG_2019 and @loanchargeAPPG all the help you can please.

Personally I am NOT going to settle and I would love it if other people didn't either as will certainly make life harder for HMRC.
I know AML has dropped the JR (timing of times article and criticism seems connected) and HMRC are going to try to rush APNs out as fast as possible before the review but worth resisting (imho) till then. There is a case for APPG delaying APNs while the review takes place.
Settling makes little difference in my calc (so it is easier for me) but I had to confess before for the DTA scheme and I'm not confessing and accepting a lie and years of bending over so they can bleed me dry with no come back just to make their spiteful vendetta easier.

While I'm campaigning :-) probably worth signing this too to stop Mel Stride lying to the public.
Make it a criminal offence for MPs to deliberately mislead the general public. - Petitions.
It appears that one of these was done last year but no impact.
Make it illegal for any UK politician to lie or mislead the public. - Petitions
Not sure if there's now a parilamentary conduct board this could be referred to?

Apologies if I have broken some forum posting rule here but I am unconnected with any of these groups other than supporting them and thinking they are our best chance at some justice

[webberg]

In my opinion, there is a big difference between working at a bank and being told/advised to use a scheme like those at Goldmans or JPM promoted and used for whatever reason and using a mass marketed scheme that was not proprietary to a bank/Big 4.

It's unfortunate that HMRC pool these scenarios when supplying "evidence" to the public, Parliament, FOI requets, etc.

They claim for example that a success against an EBT used by an owner managed business as a cash extraction device is the same as not chasing the employer/promoter behind a contractor loan scheme.

I can see why but they are different.

[InNZ]

If you can prove that statement, I'd like to discuss it please.

I can't prove it, and I know it's only hearsay from speaking to some permie friends at the bank I worked at, but back in the late 1990's, early 2000's they all took their bonuses as EBTs.

[EBTContractor]

If you can prove that statement, I'd like to discuss it please.

Try this: JPMorgan 500m HMRC deal | ICAEW Economia

Hmmm it'd be hard... It's going back 10 years. What iliketax posted sums it up.

I do remember one situation at Henderson Global Investors the perm lot got paid bonuses via EBTs/other loan thing and the options were do you want to max your return or not. Basically you had to go with loans.

I know since then virtually everyone has received DAs and paid back what HMRC claim is due...

My situation was I could use my own ltd or go via Edge Consulting with the latter being the recommended route as less paperwork and everyone else using them including the permies.

[Iliketax]

If you can prove that statement, I'd like to discuss it please.

Try this: JPMorgan 500m HMRC deal | ICAEW Economia

[webberg]

When I signed up working for the banks in the Square Mile, I had to use one of these mobs that did loans. On the trading floor everyone including perm staff were paid in loans.

If you can prove that statement, I'd like to discuss it please.

[EBTContractor]

When I signed up working for the banks in the Square Mile, I had to use one of these mobs that did loans. On the trading floor everyone including perm staff were paid in loans.

[here4beer]

Agreed. I don't think any of us went into all of this out of greed.

I chose my umbrella company (albeit naively) like I choose my car insurance. You don't go with a cheaper insurance premium provider out of greed, it just seemed like the best deal at the time. We were assured by the provider that it was legal (HMRC/QC approved ). If anything, it was mis-selling.

I was initially only intending to be on contract for a couple of months. Had I known I would be there for a number of years I would have definitely gone Limited. I'm sure others made the same decision down to convenience, not because of greed.

Now, years later, the victims of this are labelled as tax cheats by the general public. We were scammed, and then we were slandered as cheats. Whereas the truth is that none of this was to supplement a lavish lifestyle. The increment in the grand scheme of things was nominal, compared to going down the Limited route.

You're lucky. If it helps, I went down the limited company route. I now owe personal tax on the loan - which i knew about when settling. However I've since learnt I also need to pay 'readjusted' company corporation tax, which is about the same amount again.

I also fell for the marketing BS. HMRC Approved, QC opinion, full £2mill of insurance, all in the UK, etc etc.

The promoter is still trading and active today. But HMRC seem only interested in me. Work that one out.

[hudson]

Good read, until the comments. It's a shame the public still don't fully understand. Accusing everyone of using underground illegal offshore tax avoidance schemes, the propaganda is working...

I think it made 9% difference to my take home. Purely for ir35 protection of the unknown, to concentrate on the actual job itself. The extra money only ended up in a SIPP (pension) anyway. Hardly champagne and hookers.

Agreed. I don't think any of us went into all of this out of greed.

I chose my umbrella company (albeit naively) like I choose my car insurance. You don't go with a cheaper insurance premium provider out of greed, it just seemed like the best deal at the time. We were assured by the provider that it was legal (HMRC/QC approved ). If anything, it was mis-selling.

I was initially only intending to be on contract for a couple of months. Had I known I would be there for a number of years I would have definitely gone Limited. I'm sure others made the same decision down to convenience, not because of greed.

Now, years later, the victims of this are labelled as tax cheats by the general public. We were scammed, and then we were slandered as cheats. Whereas the truth is that none of this was to supplement a lavish lifestyle. The increment in the grand scheme of things was nominal, compared to going down the Limited route.

[regron]

Loan Charge stories in the FT

HMRC seem to be gradually giving more time to pay and softening stance on bankruptcy.

Ask yourself why that is. Could it be that the amount of pressure that has been put on people to settle, along with the complete mis-understanding of what we all have stashed away has lead to nowhere near the take up in CLSO’s. Remember, CLSO1 was supposed to be a ‘one and only chance’.

They aren’t getting anywhere near enough takers, so have no choice really, it’s the next tactic to try and sweep up more money.

Don’t think for a minute they are doing it out of compassion, or as a favour.

[dammit chloe]

HMRC seem to be gradually giving more time to pay and softening stance on bankruptcy.

Giving all these highly paid contractors 7 years to pay so long as they are earning 30,000 or less. Artificial figleaf to appear considerate.

[GreenMirror]

HMRC seem to be gradually giving more time to pay and softening stance on bankruptcy.