“ I owe £180,000 in tax and I haven’t told my wife” “ I owe £180,000 in tax and I haven’t told my wife” - Page 8
Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Posts 71 to 80 of 108
  1. #71

    My post count is Majestic

    AtW is always on top

    AtW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    57,147

    Default

    Loan charge participants successfully argued that loans were not sham or bogus, but in fact bona fide commercial loans.


  2. #72

    Should post faster

    NowPermOutsideUK is too good to be a permie


    Join Date
    Sep 2020
    Posts
    188

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AtW View Post
    Loan charge participants successfully argued that loans were not sham or bogus, but in fact bona fide commercial loans.

    That’s why I asked how liquidators are chasing loans if the judge has found them to be bogus

  3. #73

    bored now

    eek is always on top

    eek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    😂
    Posts
    26,494

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NowPermOutsideUK View Post
    I know this is general so forgive me for asking but having read the hmrc forums can I just make sure I understand in a nutshell what happened to people who took out loans as disguised renumeration

    1) hmrc are rolling up all the loans and taxing them in one year - ok that I understand and expected from the loan scheme

    2) more worryingly liquidators are now chasing the contractors and asking for the loans to be repaid

    Is this the way the cookie crumbles with the contractor get shafted by both hmrc and liquidator or a bogus loan?

    Like I said I did not do this loan scheme but if (2) is true then this is really nuts
    2) is the obvious final pay-off if you are a loan organiser who just wants the money but that can be split into 2 separate pots - those like Felicitas who are just after more money and liquidators who are just doing their job.

    Liquidators have to recover the money they can recover - which means chasing the people who were loaned money for the money they received. Most of those cases seem to reflect schemes by a Mr Sacco who to be frank doesn't seem to have been that good at administrating the schemes.
    merely at clientco for the entertainment

  4. #74

    bored now

    eek is always on top

    eek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    😂
    Posts
    26,494

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AtW View Post
    Loan charge participants successfully argued that loans were not sham or bogus, but in fact bona fide commercial loans.

    If you read the HMRC forum you will notice I often talk about Schrodinger money where it is both income (to HMRC) and a loan (to the scheme organisers) at the same time. And both items are actually completely valid so you may well owe HMRC money and still need to repay the loan.
    merely at clientco for the entertainment

  5. #75

    My post count is Majestic

    AtW is always on top

    AtW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    57,147

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by eek View Post
    If you read the HMRC forum you will notice I often talk about Schrodinger money where it is both income (to HMRC) and a loan (to the scheme organisers) at the same time. And both items are actually completely valid so you may well owe HMRC money and still need to repay the loan.
    But that’s completely unfair!

  6. #76

    bored now

    eek is always on top

    eek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    😂
    Posts
    26,494

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AtW View Post
    But that’s completely unfair!
    If you think it's unfair don't use the toys of millionaires to fund a lifestyle you really can't afford.
    merely at clientco for the entertainment

  7. #77

    My post count is Majestic

    AtW is always on top

    AtW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    57,147

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NowPermOutsideUK View Post
    That’s why I asked how liquidators are chasing loans if the judge has found them to be bogus
    Well, if the judge found loans to be bogus then surely it’s criminal tax evasion then rather than that mythical “legal tax avoidance”?

    Govt would have to double jails to keep participants of these schemes, plus lose tax on what they earn during years, so I guess that’s why they did not do it.

  8. #78

    Contractor Among Contractors

    DealorNoDeal is NOT a disguised employee

    DealorNoDeal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    1,495

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NowPermOutsideUK View Post
    Is this the way the cookie crumbles with the contractor get shafted by both hmrc and liquidator or a bogus loan?
    Urban Dictionary: spit-roast
    Scoots still says that Apr 2020 didn't mark the start of a new stock bull market.

  9. #79

    bored now

    eek is always on top

    eek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    😂
    Posts
    26,494

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AtW View Post
    Well, if the judge found loans to be bogus then surely it’s criminal tax evasion then rather than that mythical “legal tax avoidance”?

    Govt would have to double jails to keep participants of these schemes, plus lose tax on what they earn during years, so I guess that’s why they did not do it.
    It's only a "bogus loan" in relationship to the fact the loan only existed as a means of avoiding (or delaying) income tax.

    It is still a loan when it comes to a liquidator recovering assets to pay the other debts of the company.
    merely at clientco for the entertainment

  10. #80

    Respect my authoritah!

    NotAllThere is always on top

    NotAllThere's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Far away from HMRC
    Posts
    23,778

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AtW View Post
    This is a _V_ery good question...
    Hmm. I do find a match with AtW however....
    Quote Originally Posted by DealorNoDeal View Post
    Making it a criminal offence to run schemes would be a better deterrent. The risk of jail time would soon put a stop to the scheme pedlers.
    Nah. Just make the scheme peddlers (and QC who gave the opinion) liable for unpaid tax if the schemes don't work.
    Down with racism. Long live miscegenation!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •