Reply to: Track the Finance Bill 2020-21 here

[kryten22uk]

Following agreement by both Houses on the text of the Bill it received Royal Assent on 22 July. The Bill is now an Act of Parliament (law).

[DealorNoDeal]

And ironically the ones that can't afford to pay probably make up the meat of any revenue the Treasury hopes to gain.

My guess is HMRC have already collected (or are collecting through TTP) the bulk of the money they're going to get. Certainly the "easy" money.

Many people who could settle will already have done so.

I doubt many will have opted not to settle and fall under the loan charge. (The loan charge may work out cheaper for some, especially now it can be spread across 3 years, but for the majority settling still makes the most sense.)

What HMRC will then be left with is the harder stuff:
1) pre-2010 open years
2) people who are skint
3) the LC resistance (HR, BG etc)

And I hope it's fecking hard work for them.

[dammit chloe]

On that we can agree.

And, obviously, if you've no hope of paying it (even with TTP) then you haven't got much to lose by rolling the dice with one of the mitigation strategies. I certainly would if I was in that situation.

It's a bit of a tougher call if you can afford to pay it or settle.

And ironically the ones that can't afford to pay probably make up the meat of any revenue the Treasury hopes to gain.

[DealorNoDeal]

At the risk of stating the bleeding obvious, HMRC will consider ANY means, method, structure, argument or waving of magic wands, on the loan charge unwelcome and will challenge them all.

The ONLY risk free approach to the loan charge is to pay it.

On that we can agree.

And, obviously, if you've no hope of paying it (even with TTP) then you haven't got much to lose by rolling the dice with one of the mitigation strategies. I certainly would if I was in that situation.

It's a bit of a tougher call if you can afford to pay it or settle.

[webberg]

At the risk of stating the bleeding obvious, HMRC will consider ANY means, method, structure, argument or waving of magic wands, on the loan charge unwelcome and will challenge them all.

The ONLY risk free approach to the loan charge is to pay it.

[DealorNoDeal]

I was warning people PRE 5th April 2019 not to get involved in structuring to avoid the loan charge.

Whatever HR is doing is clearly not structuring, given the date today.

I'm not tarring HR's position with the same brush as a structured answer because it is a very different position.

Well I guess we'll find out in a few months what HMRC makes of it.

Somehow I don't think they'll make the same distinction as you.

[webberg]

No, but it wasn't that long ago that you were warning people, in no uncertain terms, not to use clever schemes to try and avoid the LC.

Obviously there's a reason you don't want to tar the HR thing with the same brush. Which is fine, and there's no need to elaborate.

I was warning people PRE 5th April 2019 not to get involved in structuring to avoid the loan charge.

Whatever HR is doing is clearly not structuring, given the date today.

I'm not tarring HR's position with the same brush as a structured answer because it is a very different position.

[DealorNoDeal]

Let's be clear (and not pedantic).

I don't "know" what HR plan because I have not seen their reasoning, their proposed wording, any advice they may or may not have.

It would hardly be fair to offer an opinion when I'm not in possession of ALL the facts.

No, but it wasn't that long ago that you were warning people, in no uncertain terms, not to use clever schemes to try and avoid the LC.

Obviously there's a reason you don't want to tar the HR thing with the same brush. Which is fine, and there's no need to elaborate.

[webberg]

Let's be clear (and not pedantic).

I don't "know" what HR plan because I have not seen their reasoning, their proposed wording, any advice they may or may not have.

It would hardly be fair to offer an opinion when I'm not in possession of ALL the facts.

[dammit chloe]

Is it just me, or does anyone else find this surprising?

Yes. They ought to know. I am sure many of their clients are aware of that option so why wouldn't they be. Surely questions have been asked.

[DealorNoDeal]

The Hamilton Rose "solution" - sorry I have no idea as to what it is or where it sits on whatever subjective scale of risk you are using.

Is it just me, or does anyone else find this surprising?

[DealorNoDeal]

starstuck (and dammit chloe),

Thank you for opening my eyes, and saving me wasting my time.

[starstruck]

I see.

I thought that perhaps some real facts, common sense and a realistic view of the situation was preferable to some of the frankly false and misleading statements being made.

Shows what I know.

Good luck.

I don't need any luck thanks.

You probably believe your own hype, but the reality is you're only here to drum up more business - you're not here for facts, common sense or realism - or altruism! You try to blind with science, but by your own admission just a few posts above, you have absolutely no idea if your plan will actually work and for you it doesn't have to, you get paid no matter what. I remember years ago arguing with you about settlement when you were peddling that "settlement is not really and end to it all". Your posts are all smoke and mirrors and often designed to create uncertainly and worry to drive people into the arms of you - a 'trusted advisor'. It's why you often throw in 'seek professional advice'. I just get so tired of reading it all.

[dammit chloe]

I see.

I thought that perhaps some real facts, common sense and a realistic view of the situation was preferable to some of the frankly false and misleading statements being made.

Shows what I know.

Good luck.

The trouble is that there are no real facts or common sense. The BG strategy may work but the strategy and advice has morphed over the 5 years or so it has been running. I myself have received vastly different advice from 2 of their senior people about a month apart. One didn't understand why the other had advised me that I didn't need to declare ( long and short of it, legally I did have to ).

So it's all very well harrumphing about real and truthful facts, common sense etc but I have no idea where one would find it amongst the tax advisor circles these days. They certainly can't agree with each other, in fact they are miles apart.

I am probably one of the few who have benefitted from the FB changes to the point HMRC have written to me saying they will no longer contact me on my loans and the matter is closed ( dubious IHT aside ). I still, where possible, would like to help those who are not out of the net yet but I honestly couldn't tell them who can be trusted.

[webberg]

DealOrNoDeal we get what you are saying .... we've been here many times before, it's a conversation that just goes on and on.

I see.

I thought that perhaps some real facts, common sense and a realistic view of the situation was preferable to some of the frankly false and misleading statements being made.

Shows what I know.

Good luck.