I wonder how many of our 600+ MP's are privately educated...a true reflection of the success of the system...if Brexit is anything to go by I wish more would be privately educated....(?!)
The trouble with having a privileged up bringing is that it is then a challenge to comprehend the life of the minions you rule over....throw away statements of how we will all have to tighten our belts etc often applies to those on the lowest rungs of the ladder disproportionally.
I am sure Justin, Gordo et al would love to make this complicated - indeed the schemes are....but the principle isn't...for it to work the loan must be repayable.....except we all know the only way the schemes work are for the loans not to be repaid....enter smoke and mirrors...
let try for #5...….it wasn't the 'scheme' that was at fault though, it would have worked in the scenario set down but the advisers didn't clarify/confirm the resident status of the taxpayer....
Indeed in your case the scheme didn't fail....its just the loan is repayable....hold the phone....a loan....repayable!?!
why would we care....we didn't push any of this rubbish as we haven't got the skill set apparently.....
If you want someone to blame look closer to home....erm I mean in the mirror....you can always tell your colleagues what they think a loan means....as oppose to say a gift....
had the same problem recently....in a stupid client vs HMRC...I would still point my suspicious finger in the direction of HMRC....I wouldn't be surprised if they only allow 1 in 3 applications to be issued in order to save on post.....
so basically client is going to give away company with expectation to be given it back in same state. Presumably maintaining it throughout albeit without being remunerated but on being gifted it back will have a nice little nest egg in the form of retained profits that haven't been drawn down, except for the little bit passed to 'friend'.
Nope I can't see any conflict of interest as a result of that....sorted!
also need to consider associated operations for IHT, and I wonder if any anti avoidance will cover the CGT element....doesn't sound contrived to me but the Revenue may take a different view...
My answers
I wonder how many of our 600+ MP's are privately educated...a true reflection of the success of the system...if Brexit is anything to go by I wish more would be privately educated....(?!)
The trouble with having a privileged up bringing is that it is then a challenge to comprehend the life of the minions you rule over....throw away statements of how we will all have to tighten our belts etc often applies to those on the lowest rungs of the ladder disproportionally.
I am sure Justin, Gordo et al would love to make this complicated - indeed the schemes are....but the principle isn't...for it to work the loan must be repayable.....except we all know the only way the schemes work are for the loans not to be repaid....enter smoke and mirrors...
let try for #5...….it wasn't the 'scheme' that was at fault though, it would have worked in the scenario set down but the advisers didn't clarify/confirm the resident status of the taxpayer....
Indeed in your case the scheme didn't fail....its just the loan is repayable....hold the phone....a loan....repayable!?!
why would we care....we didn't push any of this rubbish as we haven't got the skill set apparently.....
If you want someone to blame look closer to home....erm I mean in the mirror....you can always tell your colleagues what they think a loan means....as oppose to say a gift....
hmmm.. wonder how the friend is treating the £5k in their accounts....hopefully it will be consistent whatever the £5k represents....
had the same problem recently....in a stupid client vs HMRC...I would still point my suspicious finger in the direction of HMRC....I wouldn't be surprised if they only allow 1 in 3 applications to be issued in order to save on post.....
you have never had a barrister as a client then!?….you would think the same for them presumably...paying bills and personal admin....
so basically client is going to give away company with expectation to be given it back in same state. Presumably maintaining it throughout albeit without being remunerated but on being gifted it back will have a nice little nest egg in the form of retained profits that haven't been drawn down, except for the little bit passed to 'friend'.
Nope I can't see any conflict of interest as a result of that....sorted!
is high risk bookkeeping when you use excel together with formula...
also need to consider associated operations for IHT, and I wonder if any anti avoidance will cover the CGT element....doesn't sound contrived to me but the Revenue may take a different view...