You might also be interested in
Replies (4)
Please login or register to join the discussion.
"Accelerated Payments" ??
I must admit to not being completely clear on this aspect.
The HMRC can take a disputed tax case to Tribunal and (whilst legal and financial minds go about their ponderings and make a balanced judgement), the party targetted MUST pay ALL of this disputed tax in advance ??
So, let's take a recent case -- the old Rangers football club holding company has been cleared by two Tribunals.
But ... under these new powers they wouldf have had to stump up over £48m as was claimed ?
But ... years later they would have been cleared and found to be not liable to have payed that money ?
In the meantime, they would have gone bust for that single reason, and the HMRC claim wiould be solely responsible.
Can others see where this is going ?
HMRC are going to end up in court over vexatious and vindictive "tax" claims that simply destroy companies and people.
yet another nail in the coffin of British commerce -- brought to us al by a supposedly hands-off Conservative Government !!
I can't understand how HMRC lost the Rangers case
Who on earth would pass up real pay/salary in exchange for a tax free loan unless the loan was non-repayable, and if it is non-repayable then it isn't a loan.
Substance over form
Who on earth would pass up real pay/salary in exchange for a tax free loan unless the loan was non-repayable, and if it is non-repayable then it isn't a loan.
I think that was the view of the accountant on the original First Tier Tribunal (basic substance over form). The lawyers on the other hand were more interested in the actual legal wording.
HMRC & Rangers
HMRC were told several times -- even although they were trying to collect in retrospect, the existing alw at the time applied.
In the layrinthine, convoluted ways of finance, the nature of the EBTs set up for Rangers FC players fell inside the law and were thus legal.
The setting up of this scheme, using a completely seperate agency (abroad) to deal with and issue the loans, made this outside the remit of the old Finance Acts.
Top legal minds have examined this forensically and there's no mistake.
It's not legal now that the loopholes have been closed, but it was legal and perfectly above board then.
The issue for the loans is a matter for that seperate agency to deal with.
A devious way of payment, and one that actually didn't save the club too much money even then.
HMRC will have better luck looking into the marginal aspects of termination and one-off payments that Lord Doherty referred back.
But this should have been of no surprise to anyone -- it was a doomed case, and the more you look at all that has gone on in the background against Rangers FC, the more you have to wodner if there's more than just money and precedent in this.
Maybe something personal from somebody with influence ??