Member Since: 19th Jul 2010
25th May 2021
What a sad story. Well and truly shafted. It is almost like a reverse Ramsey principle for Kahn i.e. a series of transactions that served no commercial purpose other than the payment of tax from his point of view.
It is hard to see how his appeal could have succeeded.
7th May 2021
On the one hand it may be a witch hunt but on the other, HMRC would have to pursue many many contractors earning £50k (say) to make up for one wealthy media star. So it appears to be cost effective targeting to me.
I'd like to know the motivation for the wife being in the partnership. Fair enough if the BBC insisted. However, if he was self employed then the problem would be the BBC's and not his.
21st Sep 2020
To me, it seems an unfair result and not in the spirit of the legislation. If the site changed from London to (say) more towards Manchester then presumably that would be OK, yet journey time and cost could be still be similar.
2nd Jul 2019
Talk about theft! You’d think it would be an open and shut case, concluded within a short time. I even have pity for the guy. Nicked a few bob and lost his job. That’s bad but to have this hanging over you is not good. Murder suspects are dealt with more quickly.
27th Nov 2018
"Mandy Brown’s severe reprimand should come as a warning for tax accountants preparing for another self assessment season"
Yes, I'll remember that warning the next time I am claiming £43m of compound interest as a tax deduction! No need to scaremonger. It is clearly a very exceptional case.
26th Jun 2018
Your comment exactly proves my point!
26th Jun 2018
When I look at these two cases I just think the little guys should pack their bags and go home. Symptomatic of society as a whole. GDPR is another one. Big companies flout the laws, causing the introduction and yet ICAEW will be all over it like a rash for the little guys.
These disciplinary cases should read more like 'Fred murdered Susan and was therefore excluded from ICAEW'
9th Mar 2018
If the law is confusing then it needs redrafting.
If I am poor and I discovered that I overpaid tax of £10,000 8 years ago (when I was wealthier) because of a mistake by HMRC, then ethically that money should be repaid back to me. HMRC would ignore ethics and say I'm out of time to reclaim it. It's an extreme example but HMRC do argue the law in their favour even if it can produce a spurious result against the taxpayer.
23rd Oct 2017
Again John, that makes no reference to the capital account. It is not in dispute that if the new mortgage goes over and above the value of property when first applied to the letting business, that the interest is not allowable.
23rd Oct 2017
I would argue that the additional loan is wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the letting business as it is effectively refinancing the capital account.
Looking at it another way, what if I received a loan from my brother (interest free) to fund the original purchase and I then remortgaged property, using the excess to pay him back? Would that be wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the rental business? I would say yes.