PDA

View Full Version : What an APN looks like



Rob79
25th September 2014, 16:27
I now have such a beast and am trying to find a way to get it on a forum thread.

It's a scanned document on my desktop that doesn't seem to want to attach itself to a message like this.

Help?

Batcher
25th September 2014, 16:41
Load it up to photobucket or some other photo hosting website and use the link to show it here.

dangerouswhensober
25th September 2014, 20:26
Load it up to photobucket or some other photo hosting website and use the link to show it here.

Yes - Picasa is also a good site (doesn't carry attention-seeking ads, unlike photobucket) :

https://picasaweb.google.com

I would:

(1) Redact the document as required and digitise
(2) Create an account at the link above
(3) Upload doc image
(4) Post link on here

SantaClaus
25th September 2014, 22:05
Hi Rob, you could always put it on Dropbox/OndeDrive/Googledrive and create a publicly shareable link.

Failing that, I could put a redacted version on the NTRT website if you wish. PM me if you want me to.

Cheers

Santa

Rob79
26th September 2014, 07:56
I have sent a copy to Mr Convict who is going to make it available via the magic of the internet.

I have redacted anything sensitive but I think have retained the core elements.

I suggest that this be shown around as much as possible so that all who get one know what is arriving.

We can now give some thought to how a contractor version might look.

I also think that tactics which might be applied to stall or frustrate an APN would be best discussed off the open forum? I think there is a way to create a private sub group?

Assistance is required please.

convict
26th September 2014, 08:07
APN available to view at

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B1z20tTony1WUWFXWXlvU05ONVk/edit?usp=docslist_api

Rob79
30th October 2014, 09:58
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/issue-briefing-tax-avoidance-scheme-users-to-make-upfront-payments/issue-briefing-tax-avoidance-scheme-users-to-make-upfront-payments

The promised update on DOTAS numbers appeared today.

The above link is to the "explanation".

Unfortunately, HMRC have been as economical with the truth on how and when and APN can apply as many of the promoters you used originally were with the consequences.

When you can't trust those responsible for administering the system, is rather destroys your faith in fairness, which we're told is the "core principle" of our tax system.

QUIS CUSTODIET IPSOS CUSTODES?

dangerouswhensober
30th October 2014, 12:50
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/issue-briefing-tax-avoidance-scheme-users-to-make-upfront-payments/issue-briefing-tax-avoidance-scheme-users-to-make-upfront-payments

The promised update on DOTAS numbers appeared today.

The above link is to the "explanation".

Unfortunately, HMRC have been as economical with the truth on how and when and APN can apply as many of the promoters you used originally were with the consequences.

When you can't trust those responsible for administering the system, is rather destroys your faith in fairness, which we're told is the "core principle" of our tax system.

QUIS CUSTODIET IPSOS CUSTODES?

Two immediate observations on this:

Re:
The use of Accelerated Payments only applies to the use of tax avoidance schemes that we dispute, which generally fall into six broad categories:
•sideways loss schemes
•stamp duty land tax (SDLT) schemes
•self-employment schemes
•artificial loss deduction schemes
•capital gains schemes
•employment schemes

Seems to me that one or more of these descriptions would apply to every corporate structure that a contractor would ever use - including umbrella companies and self-employment in Ltd companies. (In other words, we reserve the right to dispute any way that contractors set themselves up ...)

Re:
We win around 80 per cent of avoidance cases that taxpayers choose to take to court ...

No - I believe that HMRC win about 80% of cases that HMRC choose to take to court - they don't take to court those cases where they believe they have little chance of winning. So ... if there are 100 cases (schemes) and HMRC decide to take sample individual cases from 10 of those to court and (eventually) win 8, then this is their 'headline' 80% figure - ignoring the 92% they either lose or don't pursue.

As you said Rob, HMRC are being 'economical with the truth' in several places in this document - and also in other documents & correspondence (e.g. assessments & settlement offers).

It certainly does destroy faith in fairness in our tax system.

meanttobeworking
30th October 2014, 12:58
Does anyone have any insight into the scheme numbers that have been removed?

Rob79
30th October 2014, 13:20
Does anyone have any insight into the scheme numbers that have been removed?

We've had 8 schemes removed (from around 1,100) and 3 added. I'm aware of the names of the additions but am not prepared to make them public. None of them are contractor schemes. One of them is a number imposed by HMRC rather than applied for by the promoter.

ads1980
30th October 2014, 13:21
Does anyone have any insight into the scheme numbers that have been removed?

I was hoping to find mine had been removed but it has not...No surprise I guess but yes, it would be interesting to find out info about the ones that hvae been removed.

DotasScandal
30th October 2014, 13:26
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/issue-briefing-tax-avoidance-scheme-users-to-make-upfront-payments/issue-briefing-tax-avoidance-scheme-users-to-make-upfront-payments.

Unfortunately, HMRC have been as economical with the truth on how and when and APN can apply as many of the promoters you used originally were with the consequences.

When you can't trust those responsible for administering the system, is rather destroys your faith in fairness, which we're told is the "core principle" of our tax system.

QUIS CUSTODIET IPSOS CUSTODES?

As long as the people are cool with it and say nothing....like good little sheeple.... why would our overlords change their strategy?
So far, they have been exceptionally successful grabbing more and more power, using only plain old "divide&conquer" tactics, over and over again ("tax dodgers" VS "honest citizens", "celebs" VS "common people", etc.).
Completely unsophisticated method, but as devastatingly effective as it's always been.

convict
30th October 2014, 14:28
"One of them is a number imposed by HMRC rather than applied for by the promoter."

And one of my fears materializes. HMRC will now add schemes in carte-blanche so that they are caught under APN.

roadstar
30th October 2014, 14:53
APN available to view at

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B1z20tTony1WUWFXWXlvU05ONVk/edit?usp=docslist_api

Thanks for sharing!!!

Rob79
30th October 2014, 15:36
"One of them is a number imposed by HMRC rather than applied for by the promoter."

And one of my fears materializes. HMRC will now add schemes in carte-blanche so that they are caught under APN.

This is not new. HMRC has always had this power.

There is a priority for those who are obliged to disclose. This starts with the designer and (usually) promoter of the scheme. Then intermediaries who market it, then advisers to the scheme, then users of the scheme and finally HMRC. The rules here have evolved over the years with advisers and users being added to the list more recently, but HMRC has always maintained that the rules mean that a scheme that is DISCLOSABLE has to have a SRN.

Therefore if a scheme is DISCLOSABLE but not DISCLOSED, it should still have an SRN.

Also means that somebody probably gets a penalty.

A lot of overseas based schemes used to have no UK promoter/adviser/intermediary in theory and therefore UK resident users would be liable to disclose. Failure to do so = penalty. I've not seen HMRC chasing such penalties so far, but who knows?

Willy Wicket
19th November 2014, 14:48
What always boils my blood, is when "Good Honest Tax paying citizens" criticise tax avoidance schemes.
It is NOT tax evasion. That is a totally different game.
Tax avoidance does not make someone a bad person or even a dodgy person.
Is not the use of ISA's Tax avoidance? is not the transferring of assets before someone dies a method of tax avoidance?
I would suspect that all "Good honest Tax paying citizens" would find the use of these methods perfectly acceptable to themselves?
:tantrum:

K12AN
10th December 2014, 09:52
My disputed amount was so inflated that I sent HMRC proof (statements etc) to show this and they revised the figure accordingly and gave me a final settlement amount. So, the disputed amount and the settlement amount are now two different figures.

When the APN is issued next month - will the be for the disputed amount or for the settlement amount?

Any ideas?

K12AN
10th December 2014, 10:08
My disputed amount was so inflated that I sent HMRC proof (statements etc) to show this and they revised the figure accordingly and gave me a final settlement amount. So, the disputed amount and the settlement amount are now two different figures.

When the APN is issued next month - will the be for the disputed amount or for the settlement amount?

Any ideas?

MrsB1974
15th December 2014, 09:43
Hi - apologies if this has been covered elsewhere (feel free to point me in the right direction) but how do I find out my scheme's DOTAS number? Thanks

DonkeyRhubarb
15th December 2014, 11:43
Hi - apologies if this has been covered elsewhere (feel free to point me in the right direction) but how do I find out my scheme's DOTAS number? Thanks

If the scheme was registered, the number should have been entered in the designated box on your tax return.

The only other way to find out is to contact the scheme provider.

ContrataxLtd
15th December 2014, 12:30
Hi Guys

I'm not sure if this article has been covered but if it hasn't I thought it may be of relevance to you all facing the threat of APN's in the not so distant future.

I've not confirmed sources etc. so please take it on face value but to summarise, HMRC have collected the first £32million from APN's issued back in August with 99% of them being paid on time.

Full article is on Accountancyage - http://http://www.accountancyage.com/aa/news/2386767/hmrc-pockets-gbp32m-from-tax-avoidance-scheme-users (http://www.accountancyage.com/aa/news/2386767/hmrc-pockets-gbp32m-from-tax-avoidance-scheme-users)

Martin
Contratax Ltd

jbryce
15th December 2014, 12:54
Hi Guys

I'm not sure if this article has been covered but if it hasn't I thought it may be of relevance to you all facing the threat of APN's in the not so distant future.

I've not confirmed sources etc. so please take it on face value but to summarise, HMRC have collected the first £32million from APN's issued back in August with 99% of them being paid on time.

Full article is on Accountancyage - http://http://www.accountancyage.com/aa/news/2386767/hmrc-pockets-gbp32m-from-tax-avoidance-scheme-users (http://www.accountancyage.com/aa/news/2386767/hmrc-pockets-gbp32m-from-tax-avoidance-scheme-users)

Martin
Contratax Ltd


"Some 30 scheme users were told in August they had 90 days to pay a total of around £29m of disputed tax upfront"

....I think these users are probably not representative of the average contractor on this site I doubt if HMRC will see a 99% payment within 90 days once the other 40,000 are issued.
Hands up all those who can pay ?

centurian
15th December 2014, 13:04
I've not confirmed sources etc. so please take it on face value but to summarise, HMRC have collected the first £32million from APN's issued back in August with 99% of them being paid on time.

99% sounds incredibly dubious, given that

a) You can ask HMRC to check the numbers again - although they may remove these from the figures on the basis that the payment is not late.
b) Getting 99% of any debtor to pay on time is very high in any circumstance
c) The likelihood of a JR causing all APNs to be placed on-hold
d) In order to get to 99%, you need a minimum sample size of 67 - (i.e. 66/67 - 98.507%). The 30 sample scheme users isn't enough.

The only way they could approach 99% is if they targeted the first batch at those they knew were going to pay up. Even so, I still don't buy it could be as high as 99% - they are just not that smart to target so effectively.

DonkeyRhubarb
15th December 2014, 13:09
"Some 30 scheme users were told in August they had 90 days to pay a total of around £29m of disputed tax upfront"

....I think these users are probably not representative of the average contractor on this site I doubt if HMRC will see a 99% payment within 90 days once the other 40,000 are issued.
Hands up all those who can pay ?

£30m is only about 0.5% of what APNs were expected to bring in.

Only 99.5% to go. :laugh

slatt
15th December 2014, 13:24
99% sounds incredibly dubious, given that

a) You can ask HMRC to check the numbers again - although they may remove these from the figures on the basis that the payment is not late.
b) Getting 99% of any debtor to pay on time is very high in any circumstance
c) The likelihood of a JR causing all APNs to be placed on-hold
d) In order to get to 99%, you need a minimum sample size of 67 - (i.e. 66/67 - 98.507%). The 30 sample scheme users isn't enough.

The only way they could approach 99% is if they targeted the first batch at those they knew were going to pay up. Even so, I still don't buy it could be as high as 99% - they are just not that smart to target so effectively.

the 99% figure seems to be for the amount of money paid back rather than the number of users who have paid, although this still doesn't make much sense as they start off saying;

"Some 30 scheme users were told in August they had 90 days to pay a total of around £29m of disputed tax upfront under the new Accelerated Payments Regime"

and they go on to say

"HMRC said more than 99% of this money was paid within the deadline. Taking into account other payments, it has received £32m in disputed tax to date."

now I'm no accountant, but 99% of 29 is not 32.... :D

jamesbrown
15th December 2014, 13:26
"HMRC said more than 99% of this money was paid within the deadline. Taking into account other payments, it has received £32m in disputed tax to date."

now I'm no accountant, but 99% of 29 is not 32.... :D

The highlighted bit. The numbers may be correct, but they were obviously targeted to allow for favourable headlines at the beginning. Less favourable figures to follow.

ContrataxLtd
15th December 2014, 14:13
I'd pretty much agree with everything that's been said, HMRC are obviously trying to spin it in a very positive way.

Likewise, the article implies that the average APN was around £1million so for those to have been paid up so quickly (if that is correct) it implies to me that the recipients have a substantial wealth. This probably does not sit in the same ball park as the average contractor facing an APN so I would imagine the 99% figure to rapidly decrease with the issue of further APN's.

I'd love to be able to verify the accuracy of the report but time isn't permitting at the moment.

Martin
Contratax Ltd

DonkeyRhubarb
15th December 2014, 14:38
There's a world of difference between contractor schemes and the stamp duty/film partnership/etc arrangements.

Not only are the other schemes mainly used by higher net worth individuals but they would typically only put a portion of their wealth into a scheme. That's why they can afford to pay the APN.

Contractors, on the other hand, put 100% of their annual income through the schemes year after year. In many cases the sum total of the APNs will be substantially more than a contractor's gross annual income.

It ain't going to be pretty.

StrengthInNumbers
15th December 2014, 16:50
I think lords wanted some review of the powers in 6 months. This is HMRC starting to paint a pretty picture for them and playing with numbers.

Rab
29th January 2015, 12:23
Does anyone know, do HMRC need to win a judicial ruling on yours or a similar scheme before they can issue an APN? Would they issue you with a follower notice (if there is such as thing) first?

My scheme was with Premier/Tenon and as Premier is no more, I have no idea if HMRC have already challenged my scheme in the courts or plan to do so in the near future.

webberg
29th January 2015, 12:57
Does anyone know, do HMRC need to win a judicial ruling on yours or a similar scheme before they can issue an APN? Would they issue you with a follower notice (if there is such as thing) first?

My scheme was with Premier/Tenon and as Premier is no more, I have no idea if HMRC have already challenged my scheme in the courts or plan to do so in the near future.

Our information is that the law firm taking the JR on behalf of a number of individuals is advising that their APN's will be suspending pending a ruling BUT they are advising clients who are not in the group to pay up if they get an APN.

HMRC does not need to win any JR case before issuing an APN.

A follower notice is issued ONLY where a decided case is similar to your situation. To the bets of my knowledge there is no such case and therefore a FN is unlikely.

If you don't know if HMRC has challenged, the best action is to ask them.

Rab
29th January 2015, 16:35
Thanks for the reply.

From what I've been reading elsewhere I assumed they'd need to win a case first and issue you with a follower notice before the APN.

Accelerated Payment Notices (APN) can be issued to taxpayers who have used a tax avoidance scheme, have received a Follower Notice and are registered under a DOTAS scheme or the subject of a GAAR counteraction.
10,000 EBT nudge letters in the Christmas post | The Abbey Tax Blog (http://abbeytaxblog.co.uk/2014/12/18/10000-ebt-nudge-letters-in-the-christmas-post/)

It just seems crazy that they can force you to pay up with no reason other that they think they'll beat you in court. When they've already lost several times.

What happens if (without your knowledge) your scheme is challenged in court and wins. Will they refund you with interest? I wouldn't bet on it. Chances are you'll never see that money again whatever happens.

ETA - just read that article again it says they can issue an APN to a follower case OR any case covered by DOTAS or GAAR :(

webberg
29th January 2015, 17:22
Thanks for the reply.

From what I've been reading elsewhere I assumed they'd need to win a case first and issue you with a follower notice before the APN.

Accelerated Payment Notices (APN) can be issued to taxpayers who have used a tax avoidance scheme, have received a Follower Notice and are registered under a DOTAS scheme or the subject of a GAAR counteraction.
10,000 EBT nudge letters in the Christmas post | The Abbey Tax Blog (http://abbeytaxblog.co.uk/2014/12/18/10000-ebt-nudge-letters-in-the-christmas-post/)

It just seems crazy that they can force you to pay up with no reason other that they think they'll beat you in court. When they've already lost several times.

What happens if (without your knowledge) your scheme is challenged in court and wins. Will they refund you with interest? I wouldn't bet on it. Chances are you'll never see that money again whatever happens.

The ability to issue an APN is NOT dependent upon a FN being issued. the list you quote is an "either/or" not "and".

Arguably HMRC has not lost several times. The arguments they run in Murray and Boyle may vary from those they intend to use in other contractor schemes. We won't know that until we see a Statement of Case that is issued by HMRC to the appellant parties in a proposed hearing. For all I know they may have done this. I would guess that they have gone over the information they have and reached an internal decisions perhaps backed by their in house lawyers. That does not mean that they are correct, just that they have reasonable grounds for dispute, an analysis of the "asserted advantage" and legislation that says that they can hold the tax until a judge decides otherwise.

Crazy? Unfair? Retrospective? Perhaps, but the LAW.

If HMRC take tax from you and it is subsequently decided that this was incorrect, HMRC is obliged to refund you. They are obliged to use their best efforts to identify and repay all those previously charged tax. Failure to do so will leave them open to not only interest (0.5% per annum) but perhaps a fine and an order to pay compensation.

That said, HMRC is not great at this type of exercise and when the boot is on the other foot, they have missed the boat for some tax avoidance scheme users. The chances of them identifying ALL those incorrectly charged are slim. Perhaps 90% plus but not all. The ONLY defence is to keep your eye on the press (professional and national) and if you think you've been missed, let them know.

The UK operates a self assessment system. This means that prima facie, you are responsible for your tax affairs and HMRC's role is to check what you have done and make enquiries as required. If YOU do not keep your tax affairs in order and as a result miss out on a repayment, chances are that it will have disappeared. The time limits for making claims varies and if it can be shown that HMRC is at fault, then is essentially unlimited. If however HMRC has used its best efforts and made no gross errors, then probably 6 years from a decision/event is about the limit. (Complicated area and you would need advice).

Rab
29th January 2015, 18:00
If HMRC take tax from you and it is subsequently decided that this was incorrect, HMRC is obliged to refund you.


I can't see how they'd ever decide that this was incorrect after they got your money.

They're almost certainly going to issue everyone on my scheme with an APN and without Premier/Tenon helping I doubt anyone will take the case to a tribunal on their own. I certainly can't afford to risk large sums of money fighting this.

I can't see that relying on similar schemes succeeding will help. HMRC only have to say, sorry that scheme was a bit different to yours and you'd need to go to court to argue the point. Again risking large sums of money with no guarantee of success.

StrengthInNumbers
29th January 2015, 18:45
Group together and sums required for courts will be manageable. If schemes did what they said in Dotas submissions, they will win. Loser will be those who said something on tin but did not implemented it.

webberg
30th January 2015, 09:19
I can't see how they'd ever decide that this was incorrect after they got your money.

They're almost certainly going to issue everyone on my scheme with an APN and without Premier/Tenon helping I doubt anyone will take the case to a tribunal on their own. I certainly can't afford to risk large sums of money fighting this.

I can't see that relying on similar schemes succeeding will help. HMRC only have to say, sorry that scheme was a bit different to yours and you'd need to go to court to argue the point. Again risking large sums of money with no guarantee of success.

That's a cynical view which I doubt is true. In my experience where HMRC has got it wrong, they do all they are required to (and sometimes more) to correct it.

The other posters here are correct - groups are the way to go.

webberg
30th January 2015, 09:23
Group together and sums required for courts will be manageable. If schemes did what they said in Dotas submissions, they will win. Loser will be those who said something on tin but did not implemented it.

I'm afraid your statement is completely incorrect.

A DOTAS submission simply says I'm going to do A+B+C and the answer is D.

Even if you do exactly that, there is no guarantee that A+B+C does =D. The only time you'll know if when either HMRC agree one of the tax years in which it happened, or a judge says so.

DOTAS disclosure is NOT (repeat NOT) any form of approval that a scheme works. It is simply complying with a law that says if you do something with a tax advantage, then you have to tell HMRC who then have a very long time to think about it and if necessary challenge it or change the law.

We have already seen cases decided which were disclosed and the Courts say don't work. We will see many more.

Please DO NOT assume that disclosure means you're safe. Simply not true.

Rab
30th January 2015, 10:06
Group together and sums required for courts will be manageable. If schemes did what they said in Dotas submissions, they will win. Loser will be those who said something on tin but did not implemented it.

Group together with who? Only Premier/Tenon have a client list for my scheme and they were meant to be taking a test case to the tribunal.

webberg
30th January 2015, 10:11
Group together with who? Only Premier/Tenon have a client list for my scheme and they were meant to be taking a test case to the tribunal.

There's a thread in this forum for users of Premier schemes. I think it works like the others in that there will be a person to contact to join a private forum of those affected. You might want to check that with an admin type?

StrengthInNumbers
30th January 2015, 16:57
I'm afraid your statement is completely incorrect.

A DOTAS submission simply says I'm going to do A+B+C and the answer is D.

Even if you do exactly that, there is no guarantee that A+B+C does =D. The only time you'll know if when either HMRC agree one of the tax years in which it happened, or a judge says so.

DOTAS disclosure is NOT (repeat NOT) any form of approval that a scheme works. It is simply complying with a law that says if you do something with a tax advantage, then you have to tell HMRC who then have a very long time to think about it and if necessary challenge it or change the law.

We have already seen cases decided which were disclosed and the Courts say don't work. We will see many more.

Please DO NOT assume that disclosure means you're safe. Simply not true.

I did not meant that. Promotors generally presented the same type of solution. As they were submitting to HMRC they ensured to tick all the correct boxes but many times did not do a correct implementation. Like in Boyle case if forex existed and was brought and sold at market rate it might would have been a different decision.
I am not saying Dotas meant safe. But if many of the schemes implemented what they said on Dotas papers they will be much stronger in answering HMRC challenge.

webberg
2nd February 2015, 10:21
I did not meant that. Promotors generally presented the same type of solution. As they were submitting to HMRC they ensured to tick all the correct boxes but many times did not do a correct implementation. Like in Boyle case if forex existed and was brought and sold at market rate it might would have been a different decision.
I am not saying Dotas meant safe. But if many of the schemes implemented what they said on Dotas papers they will be much stronger in answering HMRC challenge.

Again, I would with respect, disagree.

The provider may have said I'll do A+B+C = D. Instead they actually did A+B+E but say that this still = D.

HMRC will try to persuade the Courts that whether it was A+B+C or A+B+E, the answer is still not D.

You need to separate completely the DOTAS regime which exists just to put HMRC on notice that a tax advantage is being claimed and the actual scheme.

Most DOTAS submissions described the scheme in about 15 lines. That cannot explain adequately the detail of any scheme. Only an examination of the facts can do that.

Consequently compliance with the DOTAS submission offers very little protection from anything and does not add in any way to the strength of a scheme.

lilikins1
14th February 2015, 08:52
HMRC are thinking about this a bit and they ve obviously sent the first batch of APN s to highly probable payers. Low hanging fruit, to set example. There is no way they re going to get 99% on APN s from contractors.

Rab
18th February 2015, 21:07
In the case of a contractor, who would they send the APN to, the individual or the company? What happens when your company is no more eg. A contractor that's gone permie.

regron
18th February 2015, 21:16
The individual, as it is you who is responsible for your own personal tax affairs.

jbryce
18th February 2015, 22:33
The individual, as it is you who is responsible for your own personal tax affairs.

If the provider is still about they get a notification that it is coming.

2BA
19th February 2015, 18:57
I've just received a letter today saying I'll be getting an APN in the next 1 to 6 weeks. This is the first resurgence of this that I've had since some point in 2009 when I bought a certificate of tax deposit.
Up until that point, the company I'd used were writing any response letters & telling me what to do but they seem to have vanished now (DeGraaf Resources) so I'm a bit lost & alone!! :tumble:

What's the latest (apart from the CC/FS24) with the whole retrospective tax issue? The last I gathered was that a group of companies was fighting it & lost then appealed. Unfortunately search engines tend to come up with lots of much too old information when I search...
If I've got a CTD aswell, what am I supposed to do when I get an APN?

Is there anyone else out there who used DeGraaf too? I've still got their email that said if we had to pay the tax they'd reimburse us. Fat chance of that eh...!

DonkeyRhubarb
19th February 2015, 19:23
I've just received a letter today saying I'll be getting an APN in the next 1 to 6 weeks. This is the first resurgence of this that I've had since some point in 2009 when I bought a certificate of tax deposit.
Up until that point, the company I'd used were writing any response letters & telling me what to do but they seem to have vanished now (DeGraaf Resources) so I'm a bit lost & alone!! :tumble:

What's the latest (apart from the CC/FS24) with the whole retrospective tax issue? The last I gathered was that a group of companies was fighting it & lost then appealed. Unfortunately search engines tend to come up with lots of much too old information when I search...
If I've got a CTD aswell, what am I supposed to do when I get an APN?

Is there anyone else out there who used DeGraaf too? I've still got their email that said if we had to pay the tax they'd reimburse us. Fat chance of that eh...!

Go here and read on ->
http://forums.contractoruk.com/accounting-legal/77944-no-retro-tax-campaign-against-section-58-finance-act-2008-a-778.html#post2057036

You may also wish to consider joining NTRT (notoretrotax). A few of our members were with deGraaf.

LisaContractorUmbrella
23rd February 2015, 10:43
Not sure if you guys have seen this but HMRC have updated the list for APN's - Scheme reference numbers added: 30840889 and 38298217 https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/397149/Reviewed_Tax_Avoidance_Scheme_Ref__Numbers_January _2015.pdf

DonkeyRhubarb
23rd February 2015, 11:32
Users of the double tax scheme, affected by the retrospective legislation Section 58 FA 2008, have started receiving letters from HMRC to say that APNs will be issued in the next few weeks.

So far, we've only seen letters for the arrangements promoted by Montpelier and deGraaf.

Montpelier have said they will apply for a Judicial Review.

webberg
1st May 2015, 09:32
This is a (long) piece we prepared and published in our blog yesterday.

APN – Accelerated Payment Notice – Apocalypse Perhaps Now?
The APN juggernaut rolls on.
A Juggernaut chariot was mistakenly thought to be used to crush the bodies of the faithful beneath its wheels as a sign of their devotion. An unstoppable force driven by belief. I think HMRC regard APN in a similar way and if you have the temerity to stand before it, even the protection of a thousand year old legal system will not prevent you being ground into the earth.
When the idea of an Accelerated Payment Notice was first aired, many of us working in the tax and legal sectors were quick to condemn many areas of the scheme. In particular the inability to appeal a notice and the retrospective effect of it raised serious concerns that we would see HMRC carpet bomb pretty much anything they didn’t like.
It now appears that we didn’t guess the extent to which HMRC sees these notices as a money making machine against which the public is helpless.
Let’s take an example. You are a contractor, happily working for a number of clients, all of whom don’t want a full time employee. In the late 1990’s HMRC declares a silent war. IR35, Jones v Garnett, Personal Service Company rules, disguised remuneration, retrospective legislation (section 58 FA 2008). Contractors have been resisting especially as HMRC has taken a long time to bring cases to a Tribunal and those that have made it have produced mixed results.
As things stand, HMRC has lost a key case at several levels (Murray Group) and is awaiting a date for the next iteration. There are cases to be brought to Tribunal shortly but a decision in these is a way off. So no clear mandate for the analysis and calculation that HMRC consider is the basis of a settlement offer, recently extended to early June.
Into this confused picture flies the APN. These have been issued for many years going back to 2004! Whilst this may be within the rules, to issue a demand for tax 11 years after the alleged scheme (not a proven tax avoidance plan) smacks of retrospection. Despite the rather weak arguments rolled out in support of the process at the time of launch by Mr Gauke and those obliged ot support the position, it’s simply NOT FAIR to try to COERCE taxpayers into a settlement.
Everything these people have done is legal. Mostly it’s been disclosed using the appropriate rules (and using DOTAS rules to target schemes for APN is surely a blatant misuse of what Parliament “intended”). The details have been under investigation for YEARS. Assessments (in time and alleged discovery versions) have been made, appealed and postponed.
Is it any surprise that the thousands of contractors involved in such schemes have reacted with fury at what they see as another example of retrospective action being taken against them?
No surprise to see Judicial Review claims popping up.
In the meantime HMRC is turning the screw. An APN arrives with an inbuilt penalty regime. Failure to pay could cost a penalty of 15%. After seeking confirmation of HMRC’s view, this penalty will apply REGARDLESS of whether the APN is subsequently found to be excessive.
So if your APN is for £100 and you don’t pay, because HMRC has no basis for its calculation and no case to pin an analysis on, and eventually the liability is agreed at £NIL, HMRC say you still owe them £15! This is a penalty for getting your tax calculation CORRECT.
To compound the situation, where a Judicial review has been taken it is usually accompanied by an injunction that prevents HMRC collecting the tax. This is sensible as the very basis of the demand may be flawed. Nobody will know until the judicial process has run its course. Does this mean that the due dates of payment and penalty are also suspended? Apparently not.
HMRC claim that even where an injunction has been granted the original date for payment stands. Thus an APN due say now but where a decision from a Court might be delayed 6 months, will still have a start date for penalties now.
This is election time. Every politician will tell you that tax avoidance is fair game for remedial action. (They won’t be able to tell you what avoidance means or where avoidance starts and evasion begins or if there is a difference between “abuse”, “aggressive” or “acceptable” avoidance but nonetheless they’re all confident that “cracking down” will swell the Treasury’s coffers). Recently the man on the Clapham Omnibus has been replaced as a benchmark for common sense by a nurse. The politicians will tell you that if you take 3 minutes to explain your position to a nurse and she/he has an instant reaction of “that’s just wrong”, then you should not be doing it.
So how does the nurse test stand against the position of contractors?
Contractors are not employees. The firms that use them don’t want them to be employees. All the methods they used between perhaps 2000 and 2011 were legal, complied with several inches worth of legislation and were disclosed to HMRC. There we often significant numbers of contractors engaged by large firms and organisation and they wanted everybody to use one or perhaps two means of engagement. Agency firms sprang up to provide such and what was perhaps novel soon became normal.
Only in 2008 did HMRC decide that some of these arrangements were worthy of examination. Some indeed were worthy of retrospective legislation – always a dangerous path to follow.
By 2014, HMRC had still not persuaded a Judge to find that, in general, these “schemes” were contrary to tax law. HMRC has also had ample opportunity to narrow the definitions of what is acceptable or not in this area and has largely failed to do so.
Now these people are being faced with a demand for tax, no appeal available, no postponement available, penalty for non payment, regardless of whether the amount is actually due and no shelter to be found in a legitimate legal process.
I suggest that the “nurse test” will find this behaviour UNACCEPTABLE, UNFAIR and OUTRAGEOUS.
And it’s not just contractors. Property investment schemes, promoted by tax legislation, have the same treatment. Years of completed schemes that only now are coming under any tax enquiry. Arbitrary decisions from unaccountable people in HMRC who then refuse to discuss them is not a way to convince our nurse or anybody else that the system is fair.
Great, let’s crack down on genuine avoiders and let’s use an APN to get the money first to focus their attention.
Let’s not allow the APN to become a weapon of mass destruction of legitimate planning nor a means of collecting cash at the expense of being fair.

dangerouswhensober
1st May 2015, 10:13
This could also back-fire on the Government and HMRC.

It's commonly overlooked (especially by one particular group, such as we contractors) that the 50,000 lucky recipients of APNs will include people in many other professional occupations. When the APN legislation was being debated in the committee stages of the Finance Bill last summer, I recall reading that it would affect many who were not "High Net Worth" individuals - including supply nurses, supply teachers, medics, and just about anyone who was (a) a short-term contract worker, and (b) had taken legal steps to lessen their tax liability at that time.

There have also recently been newspaper stories about ex-Premier League footballers who face bankruptcy now that their high-earning days are over (so can't afford to pay the hundreds of thousands of pounds being demanded). (This was a front page in the Sunday Times about six weeks ago - I think the figure of 40 players was mentioned).

Might be interesting to see what one nurse (on the Clapham omnibus) would say about the tax liabilities of another ...

ads1980
1st May 2015, 10:15
This is a (long) piece we prepared and published in our blog yesterday.

APN – Accelerated Payment Notice – Apocalypse Perhaps Now?
The APN juggernaut rolls on.
A Juggernaut chariot was mistakenly thought to be used to crush the bodies of the faithful beneath its wheels as a sign of their devotion. An unstoppable force driven by belief. I think HMRC regard APN in a similar way and if you have the temerity to stand before it, even the protection of a thousand year old legal system will not prevent you being ground into the earth.
When the idea of an Accelerated Payment Notice was first aired, many of us working in the tax and legal sectors were quick to condemn many areas of the scheme. In particular the inability to appeal a notice and the retrospective effect of it raised serious concerns that we would see HMRC carpet bomb pretty much anything they didn’t like.
It now appears that we didn’t guess the extent to which HMRC sees these notices as a money making machine against which the public is helpless.
Let’s take an example. You are a contractor, happily working for a number of clients, all of whom don’t want a full time employee. In the late 1990’s HMRC declares a silent war. IR35, Jones v Garnett, Personal Service Company rules, disguised remuneration, retrospective legislation (section 58 FA 2008). Contractors have been resisting especially as HMRC has taken a long time to bring cases to a Tribunal and those that have made it have produced mixed results.
As things stand, HMRC has lost a key case at several levels (Murray Group) and is awaiting a date for the next iteration. There are cases to be brought to Tribunal shortly but a decision in these is a way off. So no clear mandate for the analysis and calculation that HMRC consider is the basis of a settlement offer, recently extended to early June.
Into this confused picture flies the APN. These have been issued for many years going back to 2004! Whilst this may be within the rules, to issue a demand for tax 11 years after the alleged scheme (not a proven tax avoidance plan) smacks of retrospection. Despite the rather weak arguments rolled out in support of the process at the time of launch by Mr Gauke and those obliged ot support the position, it’s simply NOT FAIR to try to COERCE taxpayers into a settlement.
Everything these people have done is legal. Mostly it’s been disclosed using the appropriate rules (and using DOTAS rules to target schemes for APN is surely a blatant misuse of what Parliament “intended”). The details have been under investigation for YEARS. Assessments (in time and alleged discovery versions) have been made, appealed and postponed.
Is it any surprise that the thousands of contractors involved in such schemes have reacted with fury at what they see as another example of retrospective action being taken against them?
No surprise to see Judicial Review claims popping up.
In the meantime HMRC is turning the screw. An APN arrives with an inbuilt penalty regime. Failure to pay could cost a penalty of 15%. After seeking confirmation of HMRC’s view, this penalty will apply REGARDLESS of whether the APN is subsequently found to be excessive.
So if your APN is for £100 and you don’t pay, because HMRC has no basis for its calculation and no case to pin an analysis on, and eventually the liability is agreed at £NIL, HMRC say you still owe them £15! This is a penalty for getting your tax calculation CORRECT.
To compound the situation, where a Judicial review has been taken it is usually accompanied by an injunction that prevents HMRC collecting the tax. This is sensible as the very basis of the demand may be flawed. Nobody will know until the judicial process has run its course. Does this mean that the due dates of payment and penalty are also suspended? Apparently not.
HMRC claim that even where an injunction has been granted the original date for payment stands. Thus an APN due say now but where a decision from a Court might be delayed 6 months, will still have a start date for penalties now.
This is election time. Every politician will tell you that tax avoidance is fair game for remedial action. (They won’t be able to tell you what avoidance means or where avoidance starts and evasion begins or if there is a difference between “abuse”, “aggressive” or “acceptable” avoidance but nonetheless they’re all confident that “cracking down” will swell the Treasury’s coffers). Recently the man on the Clapham Omnibus has been replaced as a benchmark for common sense by a nurse. The politicians will tell you that if you take 3 minutes to explain your position to a nurse and she/he has an instant reaction of “that’s just wrong”, then you should not be doing it.
So how does the nurse test stand against the position of contractors?
Contractors are not employees. The firms that use them don’t want them to be employees. All the methods they used between perhaps 2000 and 2011 were legal, complied with several inches worth of legislation and were disclosed to HMRC. There we often significant numbers of contractors engaged by large firms and organisation and they wanted everybody to use one or perhaps two means of engagement. Agency firms sprang up to provide such and what was perhaps novel soon became normal.
Only in 2008 did HMRC decide that some of these arrangements were worthy of examination. Some indeed were worthy of retrospective legislation – always a dangerous path to follow.
By 2014, HMRC had still not persuaded a Judge to find that, in general, these “schemes” were contrary to tax law. HMRC has also had ample opportunity to narrow the definitions of what is acceptable or not in this area and has largely failed to do so.
Now these people are being faced with a demand for tax, no appeal available, no postponement available, penalty for non payment, regardless of whether the amount is actually due and no shelter to be found in a legitimate legal process.
I suggest that the “nurse test” will find this behaviour UNACCEPTABLE, UNFAIR and OUTRAGEOUS.
And it’s not just contractors. Property investment schemes, promoted by tax legislation, have the same treatment. Years of completed schemes that only now are coming under any tax enquiry. Arbitrary decisions from unaccountable people in HMRC who then refuse to discuss them is not a way to convince our nurse or anybody else that the system is fair.
Great, let’s crack down on genuine avoiders and let’s use an APN to get the money first to focus their attention.
Let’s not allow the APN to become a weapon of mass destruction of legitimate planning nor a means of collecting cash at the expense of being fair.


That, Mr Webberg is the most accurate article I have ever read about this! :yay::yay:

Penguin
1st May 2015, 10:53
Is the blog public - I'd like to share it if poss?

webberg
1st May 2015, 11:11
Is the blog public - I'd like to share it if poss?

yes it's public.

We post it to our our website (which will be running this weekend) and contribute it to others.

feel free to distribute but please say it's a personal opinion.

zimbtar
1st May 2015, 14:15
HSBC files: UK tax officials under fire for allowing payment amnesty | Business | The Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/news/2015/may/01/hsbc-files-uk-tax-officials-under-fire-for-allowing-payment-amnesty)


" .. explain why HSBC evaders were encouraged to use a process called the Liechtenstein Disclosure Facility (LDF), which allowed them to pay the tax avoided plus a fine equal to only 10% of the money owed. Had tax inspectors chosen not to use the facility, the letter claims, they could have imposed penalties of up to 200%. Those who opted for the amnesty were also given immunity from prosecution.."

These are properly rich people - again they aren't getting hammered and in some cases let off anyway.

1 Prosecution .....

15% unrecoverable fines for those receiving an APN (all of which disclosed to HMRC under dotas rules) .... What would the Nurse in the street say to that and it's fairness...

Tweedle
3rd May 2015, 09:38
HSBC files: UK tax officials under fire for allowing payment amnesty | Business | The Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/news/2015/may/01/hsbc-files-uk-tax-officials-under-fire-for-allowing-payment-amnesty)


" .. explain why HSBC evaders were encouraged to use a process called the Liechtenstein Disclosure Facility (LDF), which allowed them to pay the tax avoided plus a fine equal to only 10% of the money owed. Had tax inspectors chosen not to use the facility, the letter claims, they could have imposed penalties of up to 200%. Those who opted for the amnesty were also given immunity from prosecution.."

These are properly rich people - again they aren't getting hammered and in some cases let off anyway.

1 Prosecution .....

15% unrecoverable fines for those receiving an APN (all of which disclosed to HMRC under dotas rules) .... What would the Nurse in the street say to that and it's fairness...

Because it's one rule for the rich and well-connected, another for the average Jo - that's you and me, well certainly me...case in point -
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4d9e16b4-ee3d-11e4-98f9-00144feab7de.html#axzz3Z49I3Mez

Unlike me, I don't think she'll be selling her house to pay any tax bills somehow...:ohwell

Sadly fairness doesn't come into any of this, I know it doesn't help but I stand by my previous thoughts...http://forums.contractoruk.com/hmrc-scheme-enquiries/86794-edge-ebt-thread-131.html#post2067898

DotasScandal
3rd May 2015, 09:57
yes it's public.

We post it to our our website (which will be running this weekend) and contribute it to others.

feel free to distribute but please say it's a personal opinion.

Nice one, Webberg!!
We'd like to link to it when it's online (with the appropriate disclaimer)

"This is a penalty for getting your tax calculation CORRECT."

Ha ha, that part really sums it all up! Heads I win, tails you lose! Truly the "spirit of the law" as envisioned by Gauke the Duplicitous...

bhavvy
19th May 2015, 21:11
Tribunal orders HMRC to pay taxpayers' costs in avoidance case - RPC Tax Take (http://www.rpc.co.uk/index.php?option=com_easyblog&view=entry&id=1496&Itemid=129)

StrengthInNumbers
19th May 2015, 21:26
Very good news. Love it

DotasScandal
19th May 2015, 22:36
Very good news. Love it

Me too!
Anything that exposes HMRC as the bullies that they are is excellent.

StrengthInNumbers
20th May 2015, 07:55
Exposes and set boundaries for HMRC. Looking forward to rangers, UBS and detuche bank cases in higher courts this year.

Who knows if HMRC lose flat out all EBT cases, we might get a chance to sue for damages all this has caused. I am keeping a log.

fielder
21st May 2015, 19:12
Well this is the **** take, I have just received the notice of an APN on its way in my letter box today dated late April! Yes nearly a month! If my APN arrives in the letter box before the 2 weeks can I appeal for extra time at least, especially if I have 60 days and not the 90 days? Yes it could make the world of a difference for someone who cannot pay the bill right now or even in 90 days without a loan or time to pay :-(

webberg
22nd May 2015, 06:42
Well this is the **** take, I have just received the notice of an APN on its way in my letter box today dated late April! Yes nearly a month! If my APN arrives in the letter box before the 2 weeks can I appeal for extra time at least, especially if I have 60 days and not the 90 days? Yes it could make the world of a difference for someone who cannot pay the bill right now or even in 90 days without a loan or time to pay :-(

The advance warning means nothing.

You get 90 days from the date of the APN to pay.

If the APN is delayed, then you should make a representation as soon as you get it asking for additional time.

mulberryblue
22nd May 2015, 07:42
Since APN's etc are sent out in brown envelopes via normal post, how can HMRC prove anyone ever received them. If we send appeals to HMRC we have to send them recorded / signed for, in order to be to provide proof we sent it, at a latter date. Surely HMRC have a duty to make sure we have received there missives :wink

webberg
22nd May 2015, 08:02
Since APN's etc are sent out in brown envelopes via normal post, how can HMRC prove anyone ever received them. If we send appeals to HMRC we have to send them recorded / signed for, in order to be to provide proof we sent it, at a latter date. Surely HMRC have a duty to make sure we have received there missives :wink

Wrong on both counts.

All HMRC has to prove is that they left their office. Failure of the Post Office to deliver is not enough to argue that a demand etc was not received. Proof of receipt is not required.

If you appeal etc, you're not obliged to send them recorded delivery. It's certainly sensible, but not necessary.

fielder
22nd May 2015, 09:34
Thank you Webberg, I thought as much :-)

chr16v
15th June 2015, 09:04
i have just recieved a letter from HMRC notifiying me of an imminent APN in the next 1-6 weeks. Yes i was expecting it some time soon, so no surprise there.

My question is:

If i want to write to my local MP to engage their help in supporting me with regards to "exceptional circumstances", are there any template letters floating around?
I have been onto the NTRT site and there is some generic material from last years lobbying there but i wondered if there is anything more suitably tailored, somewhere on this site.

thanks

mukil
19th June 2015, 14:15
Hi All,
I received enquiry letters 1.5 yrs back for around £35K.

I contacted HMRC, send them proofs and the amount was proven to be £17K. There was a letter from HMRC to confirm this.

But, I received an APN recently with an amount mentioning £35K. I am not sure why HMRC does not have any records except bugging for money and worst part is they call this threat as Lawful.

I already sent a letter but no response so for. Could you please kindly advice what are the possible actions that I could take on this.

Thanks for your suggestions.

creativity
21st June 2015, 22:05
Hi All,
I received enquiry letters 1.5 yrs back for around £35K.

I contacted HMRC, send them proofs and the amount was proven to be £17K. There was a letter from HMRC to confirm this.

But, I received an APN recently with an amount mentioning £35K. I am not sure why HMRC does not have any records except bugging for money and worst part is they call this threat as Lawful.

I already sent a letter but no response so for. Could you please kindly advice what are the possible actions that I could take on this.

Thanks for your suggestions.

I have replied to your post on the other thread. The APN will be amended (minus interest) so don't worry - the APN and settlement teams are completely isolated from one another.

Please don't use expensive tax specialists as they are only after your money, some are leaches so beware. No specialist has a magic-bullet like panacea that will lower your liability so in my opinion are a waste of time and money. Your liability can be easily calculated using online calculators or excel for relevant years. Join a group if you want to defer the APN for a year or so by going the JR route although add-in more costs if they follow it to court.

MrsB1974
26th June 2015, 10:13
I saw a post by Rob79 a few months ago (probably six months ago actually; time flies and all that) where he stated a few bullet points of the repercussions of not paying an APN / debt to Hector.

I've searched for the post but with no luck.

Can anyone please recall or advise?

I'm no longer in the UK and the London address where Hector is sending my post will soon be invalid. I have no plans to return to work in the UK in the future but will definitely visit, plus I still have state and private pensions there. The country where I'm living now *does* have a tax treaty with the UK.

Am I crazy to even contemplate this?

webberg
26th June 2015, 10:18
I saw a post by Rob79 a few months ago (probably six months ago actually; time flies and all that) where he stated a few bullet points of the repercussions of not paying an APN / debt to Hector.

I've searched for the post but with no luck.

Can anyone please recall or advise?

I'm no longer in the UK and the London address where Hector is sending my post will soon be invalid. I have no plans to return to work in the UK in the future but will definitely visit, plus I still have state and private pensions there. The country where I'm living now *does* have a tax treaty with the UK.

Am I crazy to even contemplate this?

You would be advised to speak with a professional in this area.

LandRover
30th June 2015, 12:16
HI All

I received APN and await another any day now...

I signed into my HMRC account and it doesn't show the APN demand or payment. Is the whole APN system setup by HMRC separate, as in liabilities and payments won't appear on the self-assessment portals or is the admin that bad it will take weeks ?

regron
30th June 2015, 12:23
Totally separate LR from what I know. All you will see in your SA account are any monies outstanding due to appeals you lodged, prior to all this APN ***** kicking off.

MrsB1974
3rd July 2015, 09:15
You would be advised to speak with a professional in this area.

I've pm'd you webberg.

ads1980
6th July 2015, 12:09
I've just received my 3rd APN this morning for 2010/11 however, I have only ever received an enquiry letter about this period in the past. My scheme provider did respond to HMRC about the enquiry letter so I'm just wondering now if a) HMRC are able to issue an APN on the back of just an enquiry letter and b) what are the timescales for doing so?

DotasScandal
6th July 2015, 12:55
I've just received my 3rd APN this morning for 2010/11 however, I have only ever received an enquiry letter about this period in the past. My scheme provider did respond to HMRC about the enquiry letter so I'm just wondering now if a) HMRC are able to issue an APN on the back of just an enquiry letter and b) what are the timescales for doing so?

a) absolutely

b) no timescales and no time limit

webberg
6th July 2015, 13:13
I've just received my 3rd APN this morning for 2010/11 however, I have only ever received an enquiry letter about this period in the past. My scheme provider did respond to HMRC about the enquiry letter so I'm just wondering now if a) HMRC are able to issue an APN on the back of just an enquiry letter and b) what are the timescales for doing so?

If Conditions A, B & C are met (section 219 FA 2014), then an APN can be issued.

Condition A = tax enquiry is in progress or you have made an appeal not yet settled
Condition B = there is a return or a claim that a tax advantage arises from particular arrangements
Condition C = there has been a follower notice, DOTAS SRN or action under GAAR

Understanding what the above mean is a separate matter.

LandRover
12th July 2015, 15:03
On payment of an APN does the interest cease being added?

Thanks in advance.

DotasScandal
12th July 2015, 17:57
On payment of an APN does the interest cease being added?
Thanks in advance.

Yes

dezze
23rd July 2015, 13:48
Is it possible to pay an APN with a Credit Card?

Sorry if been asked before (searched but couldn't find). I haven't received an APN as yet, so don't know the possible payment methods....

DotasScandal
23rd July 2015, 14:58
Is it possible to pay an APN with a Credit Card?
Sorry if been asked before (searched but couldn't find). I haven't received an APN as yet, so don't know the possible payment methods....

No.
Electronic transfer or cheque.

jamesbrown
20th September 2015, 09:34
Possibly not the best place, but FYI:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/tax/11865618/HMRC-uses-new-powers-on-contractors-I-was-told-to-pay-30000-within-90-days.html

fizzy
20th April 2016, 14:53
I still haven't received an APN and I haven't received a letter to say that I should receive one, should I be worried?

I have received all the other correspondence and a CLSO but no APN.

BrilloPad
20th April 2016, 15:08
I still haven't received an APN and I haven't received a letter to say that I should receive one, should I be worried?

I have received all the other correspondence and a CLSO but no APN.

You should be grateful.

An APN is not automatic.

webberg
20th April 2016, 15:39
I still haven't received an APN and I haven't received a letter to say that I should receive one, should I be worried?

I have received all the other correspondence and a CLSO but no APN.

Check your HMRC account for any "outstanding" amounts. they may have allegedly posted it but it never reached you.

carling
20th April 2016, 16:21
I still haven't received an APN and I haven't received a letter to say that I should receive one, should I be worried?

I have received all the other correspondence and a CLSO but no APN.

Dont go looking for an APN, you really don't want one.
Also if HMRC have sent you one, you will certainly know about it at some point as they will start to hassle you in the hope you might pay up.

webberg
20th April 2016, 17:12
Dont go looking for an APN, you really don't want one.
Also if HMRC have sent you one, you will certainly know about it at some point as they will start to hassle you in the hope you might pay up.

Don't put your head in the sand.

Knowing you have a liability and expecting the consequences are bad enough.

Only realising you have a liability at the last minute is not going to help.

You can check your online account in a few seconds.

carling
20th April 2016, 17:41
Don't put your head in the sand.

Knowing you have a liability and expecting the consequences are bad enough.

Only realising you have a liability at the last minute is not going to help.

You can check your online account in a few seconds.

I sort of agree, however my APN's are all too real. I don't feel I'm putting my head in the sand for not chasing HMRC and potentially triggering more of the same.
Also when do the APN's appear online, is it from when they are issued or when they are due ? I've not seen any online yet, but I definitely have plenty.

bandemelbs
21st April 2016, 06:42
Not sure what you mean by checking online. Do you mean your Self Assessment online? If that's the case, can you tell me where the APN amount should appear, as I can't see anything for my APN?

regron
21st April 2016, 07:25
I don't believe you can see your APN's online, but you can see if you have a DA assessment against you.

webberg
21st April 2016, 10:12
Certainly DA's appear on your HMRC account, usually with a due date back dated.

I'm pretty sure I've seen APN values on HMRC accounts as well. Perhaps they were APNs paid that appear as a credit? I did think though that I'd seen outstanding APNs (i.e. due but not paid) as well.

I'll take myself off and check.

The core point here though is that if you have had the warning letters and such but no APN, its EXTREMELY UNLIKELY that HMRC has had a change of heart.

It's more likely that the APN was posted but failed to arrive.

Therefore, you should try to check whether HMRC think you have gone past a payment date without you knowing, rather than get a surprise.

fizzy
5th January 2017, 16:42
So following on from my post on this thread in April last year I still haven't received anything else from HMRC. No APN, no follow up letters nothing.

I haven't logged on to HMRC portal, i need to figure out how to.

rcgeorge23
5th January 2017, 17:22
So following on from my post on this thread in April last year I still haven't received anything else from HMRC. No APN, no follow up letters nothing.

I haven't logged on to HMRC portal, i need to figure out how to.

It's an incredibly confusing website.

Go here: https://www.gov.uk/log-in-register-hmrc-online-services/sign-in

And then click on the "Self Assessment using GOV.UK Verify" link - you'll then need to authenticate using one of the 3rd party identity verification providers (like Experian). Once you're logged in, click on "View account" > "Tax years". You'll then be able to see whether HMRC have issued any discovery assessments.

APNs don't appear here though. I'm not sure you can see them online.

I think the only way to be sure whether an APN has been issued is to pick up the phone. It's awkward, but better to have all the facts in front of you. Then you can start to deal with it.

fizzy
5th January 2017, 19:22
Thanks that was a very helpful post.

So HMRC have amounts for the years with "Currently suspended on appeal" so obviously they haven't gone away.


It's an incredibly confusing website.

Go here: https://www.gov.uk/log-in-register-hmrc-online-services/sign-in

And then click on the "Self Assessment using GOV.UK Verify" link - you'll then need to authenticate using one of the 3rd party identity verification providers (like Experian). Once you're logged in, click on "View account" > "Tax years". You'll then be able to see whether HMRC have issued any discovery assessments.

APNs don't appear here though. I'm not sure you can see them online.

I think the only way to be sure whether an APN has been issued is to pick up the phone. It's awkward, but better to have all the facts in front of you. Then you can start to deal with it.

whichwaytogo
2nd February 2017, 10:11
I now have such a beast and am trying to find a way to get it on a forum thread.

It's a scanned document on my desktop that doesn't seem to want to attach itself to a message like this.

Help?

I have just received one of these, relating to 2011, and wondered which is the best route to go?
The providers of the original EBT scheme are litigating, but I am not part of that group. Thanks.

accountingwisdom
10th February 2017, 13:25
Has anyone had any involvement with De Graaf Resources?
What are you doing about enquiries?

BrilloPad
10th February 2017, 15:27
Has anyone had any involvement with De Graaf Resources?
What are you doing about enquiries?

Which years is that for? LOan scheme or double taxation?