• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Reply to: A painful lesson

Collapse

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "A painful lesson"

Collapse

  • webberg
    replied
    The is a company in the UK called Montpelier Professional Ltd.

    They have recently been subject to action to recover fees from them. The owner of the fees has now obtained judgment and is pursuing them, probably to insolvency.

    Why? Because the claim was against Mr G and he (allegedly) used funds from the company to pay for the defence and therefore a loss is theirs to bear.

    All public record.

    Also public record is that RBS has a charge of some millions connected to the company and the successful action has led to them joining the party. The information I have is that the RBS positon is secured on certain personal assets which may now of course be subject to legal action.

    All public record.

    Be an interesting one to keep an eye on.

    Leave a comment:


  • washed up contractor
    replied
    Originally posted by stonehenge View Post
    Because I was warned off by veiled threats from EWG.
    Oh dear. Yes, he did that to everyone but many just ignored him.

    Leave a comment:


  • GammaMadrid
    replied
    Originally posted by sst2019 View Post
    EWG?
    TAA?

    Hmm thinking perhaps settling isn't the right choice.
    EWG = Edward Watkin Gittins. He basically is Montpelier. He really upset HMRC. When Ramsey(1955) was closed via Padmore(1989) a loophole was left. Badger Lamont admitted this in parliament. That loophole was used by the rich. EWG used it for non-rich people. HMRC went as far as to strong arm IoM police to make HMRC police officers for the day. HMRC attacked one of his schemes and the court threw it out after HMRC stated their case it was so weak. Sadly he lost when he failed to get his upper tier appeal in on time.

    TAA = The Agency Argument. Some decided not to follow EWG and went against him. They are still fighting HMRC. Caused quite a CUK fuss at the time. I wish I had gone with my gut instincts.

    Leave a comment:


  • NeedTheSunshine
    replied
    Originally posted by GammaMadrid View Post
    I know someone in TAA. I was told yesterday first tier tribunal is due in July. Very best of luck with that.
    Yes best of luck to them. I was wondering how that was going. Glad they've got a date for the first tier tribunal.

    Leave a comment:


  • sst2019
    replied
    Originally posted by GammaMadrid View Post
    Why did you not join TAA?

    I remember everyone on CUK saying TAA was a bad idea. I so bitterly regret not joining.

    I am not going to miss the Loan Charge boat and I am in touch with Phil now.
    EWG?
    TAA?

    Hmm thinking perhaps settling isn't the right choice.

    Leave a comment:


  • stonehenge
    replied
    Originally posted by GammaMadrid View Post
    Why did you not join TAA?
    Because I was warned off by veiled threats from EWG.

    Leave a comment:


  • GammaMadrid
    replied
    Originally posted by stonehenge View Post
    Was in a scheme 2002 - 2006.

    HMRC clobbered it with retro tax in 2008.

    Would have been hard but could have settled. Joined the legal fight instead.

    Fight lost in 2018. Forced to settle. Had to cough up 15 years of interest.

    A whole decade of my life with this hanging over me. Huge psychological impact. All for nothing.

    If you can afford to settle, seriously consider it for the sake of your sanity.
    Why did you not join TAA?

    I remember everyone on CUK saying TAA was a bad idea. I so bitterly regret not joining.

    I am not going to miss the Loan Charge boat and I am in touch with Phil now.

    Leave a comment:


  • GammaMadrid
    replied
    Originally posted by washed up contractor View Post
    Not sure what 'fight' you were in but the timeline is similar to mine. The fight Im in hasnt been lost in 2018 though and still very much has HMRC on the back foot.

    Victory is within sight.
    I know someone in TAA. I was told yesterday first tier tribunal is due in July. Very best of luck with that.

    Leave a comment:


  • sst2019
    replied
    Originally posted by Tomo1971 View Post
    Luckily I was only in for just over 24 months over three tax years - loans were less than 90k and so settlement is 20k with interest.

    Have managed to get that down to just over 10k so will be settling.

    The IHT situation is now starting to irk me now though as that will be another 10k probably!
    Some good hard negotiating then...

    Leave a comment:


  • here4beer
    replied
    Originally posted by Tomo1971 View Post
    Luckily I was only in for just over 24 months over three tax years - loans were less than 90k and so settlement is 20k with interest.

    Have managed to get that down to just over 10k so will be settling.

    The IHT situation is now starting to irk me now though as that will be another 10k probably!
    What? you mean the initial number was wrong? Not "you got it down"....

    Leave a comment:


  • Jedi007
    replied
    Originally posted by hudson View Post
    How did you manage to halve your settlement?
    yes how indeed, Tomo1971 can you please shed some light on this? my understanding has been there is no negotiation with HMRC?

    Leave a comment:


  • MyxALot
    replied
    Originally posted by EBTContractor View Post
    Why is there IHT on 90k? Threshold is 325k'ish.
    Depends on the type of trust used as to whether the threshold is £325 or £0.

    However you should argue IHT isn't due at all, but you'd probably need the assistance of a tax advisor to help with that.

    Leave a comment:


  • EBTContractor
    replied
    Originally posted by Tomo1971 View Post
    Luckily I was only in for just over 24 months over three tax years - loans were less than 90k and so settlement is 20k with interest.

    Have managed to get that down to just over 10k so will be settling.

    The IHT situation is now starting to irk me now though as that will be another 10k probably!
    Why is there IHT on 90k? Threshold is 325k'ish.

    Leave a comment:


  • Iter
    replied
    Why is IHT so high, thought it was roughly 1% per year

    Leave a comment:


  • hudson
    replied
    Originally posted by Tomo1971 View Post
    Luckily I was only in for just over 24 months over three tax years - loans were less than 90k and so settlement is 20k with interest.

    Have managed to get that down to just over 10k so will be settling.

    The IHT situation is now starting to irk me now though as that will be another 10k probably!
    How did you manage to halve your settlement?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X