Reply to: Churchill Knight & Boox clients being investigated as Managed Service Companies

[Protagoras]

I wonder how many people have just sold up and left the UK rather than having this nonsense hanging over them for years.

[Hareforthebear]

I suggest if HMRC needs to be held accountable anyone involved should also do the same. I have asked how they can justify the delays, the inaccuarcies and the aggressive attitude to what was not a tax avoidance or evasion scheme.

This is what winds me up the most about this. It is not some contrived scheme, I engaged a REGULATED CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT to ensure I paid the right amount of tax!! It is a totally legal and common way of providing services, HMRC themselves did (still does?) engage contractors in this manner.

It is incomprehensible and totally indefensible that it is deemed acceptable to treat taxpayers in this fashion, we are not criminal tax evaders.

How can they be in a position to demand x thousands of pounds off people but not be sure enough of their position to argue it in a tribunal several years following this.

i have to wonder if it is some way of fudging their performance or cooking the books on their side. Are these outstanding determinations treated as some kind of asset or measure of a job well done? The more interest accrued the greater this position becomes? Is it now too big to cut their losses and write it off?

it is grossly unfair. As mentioned by someone above there should be a time limit on their side. There’s no incentive whatsoever to resolve this from their perspective.

[geekergosum]

https://contractoruk.com/news/forget...ess-altogether

My rage and disgust at this knows now bounds.

I am appalled at HMRC's behaviour. The callousness and viciousness is beyond the pale. They know what they are doing. My true views would lead to a ban here, but...

The DECENT thing would be to halt all interest because of their delay. But they are not decent.

I take anti-depressants because of this trauma and now I'm told because they are busy I may have to wait several more years??? They have robbed me of my joy for the past 4.

To anybody skulking from HMRC...I wish nothing but equal and fair karmic treatment than that you give to others. Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?

Now that is out of my system.

I have placed a FOI request to find out some details about the numbers involved in the case, and have also contacted my MP.

I suggest if HMRC needs to be held accountable anyone involved should also do the same. I have asked how they can justify the delays, the inaccuarcies and the aggressive attitude to what was not a tax avoidance or evasion scheme.

[cojak]

Basically, no one is holding HMRC to account, which is bloody outrageous. They are a law unto themselves.

They go after the easy prey while studiously ignoring the fraudsters and wideboys because that's too hard.

(And I know I've been here for decades, but it's still shocking to repeat this.)

[Protagoras]

Disgraceful. What a shambles.

+1

It's completely unfair that people have to suffer such distress and uncertainty.

Not restricted of course to this matter but there's an inherent unfairness about delayed justice.
It really is long overdue that HMRC be required to prosecute within say 12 months or lose the right to do so.

And there's no way that they should be allowed to charge interest while delaying proceedings.

[Hareforthebear]

https://contractoruk.com/news/forget...ess-altogether

Disgraceful. What a shambles.

[jamesbrown]

https://contractoruk.com/news/forget...ess-altogether

[Guy Incognito]

Just an aside I paid on account in full and had my first two years thrown out, nearly 5 years on from handing my money over and 3 years on from them throwing my two years out I have yet to receive a penny back. I suspect I won't get to charge them interest.

This is mind-blowing.

[GregRickshaw]

Whilst eek is correct, HMRC have famously let many companies and their directors slip through the net on this one.

Those who didn't engage with HMRC and considering there are only around 200 fighting the case that means well over 1000 will get off 'Scott' free when HMRC win this. I have also heard but have no hard evidence of a few who managed to close their companies, HMRC though can re-open, I suspect the ones who claim they have closed their companies may have been those who didn't engage but it's all bit far east whispers.

The only fight now will be getting long TTP settlements with HMRC, trying to get the interest at a reasonable rate and holding onto any assets (your home) you may have.

Just an aside I paid on account in full and had my first two years thrown out, nearly 5 years on from handing my money over and 3 years on from them throwing my two years out I have yet to receive a penny back. I suspect I won't get to charge them interest.

[eek]

Can I close my company with this outstanding? If yes great, if no will I be able to do it after the tribunal?

Nope and probably nope afterwards. HMRC need the company open so they can get the money from the directors if the company hasn't got it.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news but that's the reality.

[LondonJamesMc]

Can I close my company with this outstanding? If yes great, if no will I be able to do it after the tribunal?

[Guy Incognito]

I'd like to remind anyone who think they may have paid themselves less than 50% of the company's revenue in any year to consult your tax lawyer as HMRC's demand can be killed that way. Qdos sent them the evidence of me withdrawing less than 50% during the year in question and eventually HMRC accepted it, set the liability to nil and I've since closed the company.

You don't need assistance, I did this myself for one of my three years.

[woody1]

I'd like to remind anyone who think they may have paid themselves less than 50% of the company's revenue in any year to consult your tax lawyer as HMRC's demand can be killed that way. Qdos sent them the evidence of me withdrawing less than 50% during the year in question and eventually HMRC accepted it, set the liability to nil and I've since closed the company.

Might also be worth bearing in mind for anyone, currently with an accountancy provider, who they fear may also be vulnerable to a future MSC attack. Taking less than 50% seems to be the only sure-fire defence.

[praxeologist]

I'd like to remind anyone who think they may have paid themselves less than 50% of the company's revenue in any year to consult your tax lawyer as HMRC's demand can be killed that way. Qdos sent them the evidence of me withdrawing less than 50% during the year in question and eventually HMRC accepted it, set the liability to nil and I've since closed the company.

[rdw1970]

It makes you wonder how much HMRC actually stand to claw back from this raid.

I suspect a tiny amount compared to dodgy schemes.

As others have previously said, it's not just about the money. A tribunal win for HMRC would make it easier for them to pursue other cases in the future and would create a strong deterrent to other contractors who follow the low salary/high dividend model with similar accountancy firms to Boox and CK.