Surely there can't be many more ambulances to chase.
Although I see, from the thread at the top of this forum, there are still plenty of firms peddling the tax scams, presumably lining up the next wave of casualties.
- 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: IHT on EBT settlement
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.
Logging in...
Previously on "IHT on EBT settlement"
Collapse
-
What a fascinating thread. The gravy train just keeps on rolling along. It seems.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Saleos View PostRe IHT you'd be right about the income point IF the income tax charge arose on the same event as that which gives rise (in HMRC's view) to the IHT charge. But it doesn't. The IT charge arose, HMRC say, when the loan was received (although strictly following RFC it would have been when the funds were contributed to the Trust) but the IHT charge arises several years later under, again they say, under s72 IHTA - an 'exit charge' - when those loans are written off. So the exemption that prevents a charge to both IHT and IT on the same event doesn't apply.
1. I'm not convinced by the exit charge on the waiver of the loan being on its full face value. Immediately before the loan receivable is waived, what is it's market value of the receivable? The loan is likely to be unsecured, have not been repaid on its due date (if there was one), likely has no interest on it (or if it does, has never been paid), may not be adequately documented and may be difficult to enforce. It would be a question of fact, but I'd expect that it would be worth significantly less than the amount of the loan. So the disposition referred to in s72(2)(c) may be a significantly less than the headline amount. But it wouldn't be zero.
2. There's also the possibility that a disposition occcured when the loan was made, especially if it is not interest bearing and repayable a long way into the future. But typically the loans would have been made very close to the time that the money was paid to the trust. So when you look at s70, the chances are that the money lent hasn't been held for less than three months, meaning the rate is 0%.
3. Assuming it is a s86 trust, there could not be a charge between the loan being made and being waived as no payments are made and the trustees would not have made a disposition.
Leave a comment:
-
What's actually happened with WTT, have they sold out to Floggit and Scarper Ltd or something?
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by woody1 View PostPerhaps they're waiting until all the other cases have been lost, before revealing their winning hand.
Leave a comment:
-
I reckon there’s a greater than 65% chance they don’t have a hand and have been bluffing all along.
some good news out of the sale of WTT Group. It appears to have been a share sale of HoldCo. So as well as the assets the purchaser acquired liabilities too. If they’re sensible they will have various warranties and indemnities in place against the vendor too. As a proper firm the acquirer will have PI and run off cover. To cover, for example, claims for professional negligence in advising clients to have loans written off despite that creating a stand alone income tax and IHT charge of which said clients weren’t warned. Or then telling those clients not to disclose it to HMRC. Or perhaps, for example, advising clients to pursue a doomed “resolution strategy” without warning that failure to pay or declare the LC would add at least 15% penalties. And risk HMRC pursuing tax on fees.
Time to send ambulance chasers after the ambulance chasers who are off in their getaway car?!
Leave a comment:
-
Perhaps they're waiting until all the other cases have been lost, before revealing their winning hand.
Leave a comment:
-
A good question!
Re actual, real, cases, Lancashire UT
case listing shows as still May 2023 but that didn’t happen. Higgs was shown as 29-30 November 23. But the UT is of course bound by Hoey on the s684(7a) stuff (ie Tribunal has no jurisdiction on the PAYE stuff so either has to persuade CoA it was wrong in Hoey or the SC that it was wrong not to hear his onward appeal.
In the same 8 year window as Hoey made it as far as a permission application to the SC, Judicial Reveiws of APNs made it to the CoA & APN penalty cases to the UT.
WTT. Nada.
Leave a comment:
-
I was reading up on the other EBT/loan groups that have taken action.
Hoey et al had their case heard at the FTTT, UTTT and Court of Appeal, culminating in an (unsuccessful) appeal to the Supreme Court. Higgs et al have been to the FTTT, and last month had their appeal heard at the UTTT. Lancashire et al have also had their case heard at the FTTT and have an appeal to the UTTT pending.
They're probably all wasting their time (and money) but it begs an obvious question. Why haven't BIG GROUP had a single case heard when they've been going 8 years?
It certainly doesn't bode well for anyone who joins their "IHT" group.Last edited by woody1; 8 December 2023, 11:19.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by woody1 View Post
For the sake of BIG GROUP members, who've been paying in and holding out hope for 8 years, I hope this isn't a rerun of what the original scheme providers did...
Milk it for as long as possible
Don't spend money on litigation fighting HMRC
Walk off into the sunset, leaving the contractors in the lurch
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by starstruck View Post
Sorry, but that's not true.
https://find-and-update.company-info...ficant-control
Mr Graham Philip Webber CEASED
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by starstruck View Post
Sorry, but that's not true.
https://find-and-update.company-info...ficant-control
Mr Graham Philip Webber CEASED
For the sake of BIG GROUP members, who've been paying in and holding out hope for 8 years, I hope this isn't a rerun of what the original scheme providers did...
Milk it for as long as possible
Don't spend money on litigation fighting HMRC
Walk off into the sunset, leaving the contractors in the lurch
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by WTFH View Post
Oh, that's an interesting claim.
CoHo still lists WTT Accountancy with WebberG as a person of significant control.
https://find-and-update.company-info...ficant-control
Mr Graham Philip Webber CEASED
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Saleos View PostIf you’d checked you would find that it is WTT Group that have been sold & there is a clue in the word GROUP. ie. it includes WTT Group, WTT Consulting, WTT Legal & WTT Accountancy. Which
one of them invoiced you for a “litigation fund”
CoHo still lists WTT Accountancy with WebberG as a person of significant control.
Who is it you work for these days, it's hard to tell from CoHo?
Leave a comment:
-
If you’d checked you would find that it is WTT Group that have been sold & there is a clue in the word GROUP. ie. it includes WTT Group, WTT Consulting, WTT Legal & WTT Accountancy. Which
one of them invoiced you for a “litigation fund”
Leave a comment:
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Streamline Your Retirement with iSIPP: A Solution for Contractor Pensions Sep 1 09:13
- Making the most of pension lump sums: overview for contractors Sep 1 08:36
- Umbrella company tribunal cases are opening up; are your wages subject to unlawful deductions, too? Aug 31 08:38
- Contractors, relabelling 'labour' as 'services' to appear 'fully contracted out' won't dupe IR35 inspectors Aug 31 08:30
- How often does HMRC check tax returns? Aug 30 08:27
- Work-life balance as an IT contractor: 5 top tips from a tech recruiter Aug 30 08:20
- Autumn Statement 2023 tipped to prioritise mental health, in a boost for UK workplaces Aug 29 08:33
- Final reminder for contractors to respond to the umbrella consultation (closing today) Aug 29 08:09
- Top 5 most in demand cyber security contract roles Aug 25 08:38
- Changes to the right to request flexible working are incoming, but how will contractors be affected? Aug 24 08:25
Leave a comment: