Barclay twins resume Littlewoods VAT battle

Kashflow logo
4

Lawyers for Sir David and Sir Frederick Barclay have returned to the High Court to pursue the final chapter of their six-year battle to extract a £1bn VAT settlement from HMRC.

The Barclay family’s catalogue business Littlewoods has already received more than £470m after HMRC accepted in 2004 that there had been incorrect VAT treatment of commissions paid to the company’s regional agents during the previous 31 years.

This led to an initial settlement which included interest of £268.2m.

However the brothers...

Please Login or Register to read the full article

The full article is available to registered AccountingWEB.co.uk members only. To read the rest of this article you’ll need to login or register. Registration is FREE and allows you to view all content, ask questions, comment and much more.

Robert Lovell
Managing Editor
AccountingWEB.co.uk
Share this content
Tags

Replies

Please login or register to join the discussion.

By JAADAMS
25th Oct 2013 17:10

Hope the Barclay Bros lose...

This is not the first time that accountingweb has written about the Barclay Bros. As readers of my articles know they have few friends in the locality of Dorchester.

Not after what they did to the manager of the Dorchester branch of Woolies/ Wellworths - see article as below titled: 'What's in a Name?' Get the details right'...link here

http://www.accountingweb.co.uk/article/what-s-name-get-details-right/532758

They have also not been nice to the Signeur of Sark either - see 'Barclay Brothers question Independence of Sarks' Signeurs' link here...

http://ukhumanrightsblog.com/2013/05/17/barclay-brothers-question-independence-of-sarks-seigneurs-and-seneschals/

 

Thanks (1)
25th Oct 2013 17:14

.

well quite, so much for the 4 year rule too, but I imagine that doesn't matter when you are that rich.

Thanks (1)
avatar
28th Oct 2013 12:13

Fiduciary duties?

Are the brothers saying that the amounts of salaries and pensions their company pays will depend on whether we (the taxpayers) bung them £1bn?  That doesn't sound right.

Or are they saying that the business will go pop if we don't pay them?  They knew it was loss-making when they bought it.

Surely their 'fiduciary duties' are to the shareholders?  Now who are they?

Thanks (2)
avatar
By Vinoo
28th Oct 2013 17:10

I think Littlewood is pushing their luck too far. In my opinion they may not be entitled for anything more than what HMRC have already given-its ex-gratia

Thanks (0)