I had a fun one 4 - 5 years ago, where I appealed against a penalty on the grounds of reliance on a 3rd party, where the 3rd party was our firm (not me, a colleague), which HMRC rejected. I notified the appeal to the FTT and spent ages preparing the case, only for HMRC to cave before I got my day in court.
"Damn", I thought.
I think this was covered in the Bible:
"Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his friend's life for his client."
Unfortunately, you could have a full-time job commenting on every instance of this error (although not necessarily on this site). The usage is rampant.
For some reason, my wife remembers Polly Peck, even mentions it occasionally. I may have tried to give her my explanation of what had happened way back in the early 90s. I must have been boring then.
But it will depend on what side of the borderline it is. I'm sure these opportunistic companies have constructed the agreements to keep it legal so I suspect that there is low likelihood of prosecution.
It is easier to respond to this comment than to an earlier condescending comment. Yes, in Ireland there was some gaming of the system. Those filing tax returns (i.e. mainly self-employed) who were able to delay or accelerate the recognition of revenue had opportunities to reduce their income tax bills for the short tax year (i.e. the period from 6th April 2001 to 31 December 2001). That seems to have been accepted as part of the one-time cost of the move but is now lost in the past. The benefits continue every year.
Changing from the antediluvian 5/6 April should have happened decades ago. Even the Irish managed it when they joined the Euro, ridding themselves of something that had marked them out as a British colony. That fact was not understood by most of a population that insisted on repainting the pillar boxes green!
The condescending reference ("even the Irish") is more than a little ironic. The Irish chose to go with calendar year for good reasons and made it happen - successfully - twenty years ago. There was no need for the additional insulting (irrelevant and untrue) remarks. Why is the UK still thinking about it?
The postmasters settled in the High Court in December 2019 and it seems likely that a large chunk of the settlement amount went to the company that provided funding for their case (litigation funder Therium). The poor victims appear to have got very little compensation relative to the suffering and distress that they endured. Yet the perpetrators appear to have avoided all personal responsibility, although they undoubtedly reaped the benefits along the way.
My answers
I think this was covered in the Bible:
"Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his friend's life for his client."
As an aside, the mistaken use of metaphors is rampant nowadays. I think it is because people read less serious writing such as newspapers, books etc.
Unfortunately, you could have a full-time job commenting on every instance of this error (although not necessarily on this site). The usage is rampant.
For some reason, my wife remembers Polly Peck, even mentions it occasionally. I may have tried to give her my explanation of what had happened way back in the early 90s. I must have been boring then.
Yes. Thanks for clarifying.
"However, this activity is nearing the point of “overexuberance” that could lead to [***] deals for some sellers"
"for some buyers"?
But it will depend on what side of the borderline it is. I'm sure these opportunistic companies have constructed the agreements to keep it legal so I suspect that there is low likelihood of prosecution.
But yes, it is disgusting.
It is easier to respond to this comment than to an earlier condescending comment. Yes, in Ireland there was some gaming of the system. Those filing tax returns (i.e. mainly self-employed) who were able to delay or accelerate the recognition of revenue had opportunities to reduce their income tax bills for the short tax year (i.e. the period from 6th April 2001 to 31 December 2001). That seems to have been accepted as part of the one-time cost of the move but is now lost in the past. The benefits continue every year.
The condescending reference ("even the Irish") is more than a little ironic. The Irish chose to go with calendar year for good reasons and made it happen - successfully - twenty years ago. There was no need for the additional insulting (irrelevant and untrue) remarks. Why is the UK still thinking about it?
The postmasters settled in the High Court in December 2019 and it seems likely that a large chunk of the settlement amount went to the company that provided funding for their case (litigation funder Therium). The poor victims appear to have got very little compensation relative to the suffering and distress that they endured. Yet the perpetrators appear to have avoided all personal responsibility, although they undoubtedly reaped the benefits along the way.