HMRC settlement Deadlines/delays and the LC

[regron]

IMO I think it would be niave of anyone to think that HMRC will agree to the BG analysis without putting up a fight; so realistically BG is a litigation group. That litigation is going to take longer than the LC to happen and I repeat my previous belief that nobody has yet found a way around the loan charge. LCAG are doing a great job, all hats off to them, my non-contracting friends are now aware of the LC from the BBC etc.. all as a result of the LCAG, maybe enough pressure will force change, I've done what I can, written to MP etc. I also hear there are a few JRs in the pipeline too, lets hope they ultimately win. But in terms of BG members getting around the LC, so they can get their well deserved day in court, well there is a very big question mark over that and the sting in the LC tail is even if you have the funds to survive the LC, you won't ever see that money again, even if BG ultimately win.

Let's hope something changes between now and April.

Totally agree that HMRC will put up a fight. They are clearly playing their usual stalling tactics ever since the LC became Law. Don't forget that regardless of the loan charge, the underlying tax dispute still needs to come to a close, regardless of the LC hitting, so the BG resolution is still very much still in play. The issue as you quite rightly pointed out, is the LC will inevitably hit first, before that can be resolved and that is why people will need to part of some kind of fighting group that is going to challenge the LC. That way if you are part of it, then you may get the LC payment delayed until that gets through the courts, which gives people breathing space.

[starstruck]

Totally agree that HMRC will put up a fight. They are clearly playing their usual stalling tactics ever since the LC became Law. Don't forget that regardless of the loan charge, the underlying tax dispute still needs to come to a close, regardless of the LC hitting, so the BG resolution is still very much still in play. The issue as you quite rightly pointed out, is the LC will inevitably hit first, before that can be resolved and that is why people will need to part of some kind of fighting group that is going to challenge the LC. That way if you are part of it, then you may get the LC payment delayed until that gets through the courts, which gives people breathing space.

^ Totally agree 100%. For those of us with closed years only, it's a case of hoping the LC is the end of it, no need for any other 'resolution'. I'm not aware of BG doing any LC fighting per se; other than supporting the work of the LCAG. So, in terms of getting the LC changed I think LCAG are the only game in town at the moment and we all need to cross our fingers for their success.

Thinking out loud, so you have open enquiries, you join BG, you join a LC JR from somewhere. Because of JR the LC is delayed for you pending outcome. BG ultimately wins in court and the open enquiries are closed. LC JR then fails. What happens then? Do you still end up having to pay the LC (+interest) even though you won in court regarding your scheme/enquiries? I have literally no idea of the answer to that, but isn't the LC separate from the underlying enquiries that BG is fighting?

[regron]

^ Totally agree 100%. For those of us with closed years only, it's a case of hoping the LC is the end of it, no need for any other 'resolution'. I'm not aware of BG doing any LC fighting per se; other than supporting the work of the LCAG. So, in terms of getting the LC changed I think LCAG are the only game in town at the moment and we all need to cross our fingers for their success.

Thinking out loud, so you have open enquiries, you join BG, you join a LC JR from somewhere. Because of JR the LC is delayed for you pending outcome. BG ultimately wins in court and the open enquiries are closed. LC JR then fails. What happens then? Do you still end up having to pay the LC (+interest) even though you won in court regarding your scheme/enquiries? I have literally no idea of the answer to that, but isn't the LC separate from the underlying enquiries that BG is fighting?

My understanding in that scenario would be yes, if the JR against LC subsequently fails, then you would have to pay the charge as the law states. However, having won the tax dispute in court would mean they could not come back for additional payments such as interest.

[dammit chloe]

^ Totally agree 100%. For those of us with closed years only, it's a case of hoping the LC is the end of it, no need for any other 'resolution'. I'm not aware of BG doing any LC fighting per se; other than supporting the work of the LCAG. So, in terms of getting the LC changed I think LCAG are the only game in town at the moment and we all need to cross our fingers for their success.

Thinking out loud, so you have open enquiries, you join BG, you join a LC JR from somewhere. Because of JR the LC is delayed for you pending outcome. BG ultimately wins in court and the open enquiries are closed. LC JR then fails. What happens then? Do you still end up having to pay the LC (+interest) even though you won in court regarding your scheme/enquiries? I have literally no idea of the answer to that, but isn't the LC separate from the underlying enquiries that BG is fighting?

Isn't BG settlement based not necessarily about winning in court. If so I would expect that settlement would have to close all matters to do with the affected years and schemes, never to be spoken of again. Just as CLS02 is supposed be exempt from LC.

[regron]

Isn't BG settlement based not necessarily about winning in court. If so I would expect that settlement would have to close all matters to do with the affected years and schemes, never to be spoken of again. Just as CLS02 is supposed be exempt from LC.

Can't go into too much detail regarding their overall strategy, for obvious reasons but yes, like any settlement it would be preferable not to go to court. But we are talking about HMRC here don't forget, so hope for the best but always plan for the worse.

[starstruck]

Isn't BG settlement based not necessarily about winning in court. If so I would expect that settlement would have to close all matters to do with the affected years and schemes, never to be spoken of again. Just as CLS02 is supposed be exempt from LC.

Some people might tell you that, but personally I don't believe HMRC are going to 'let off' thousands of people owing probably many 10s millions without a fight (i.e. court)? There is most definitely no "negotiation" between BG and HMRC re: settlement (i.e. coming to a deal). That was what I originally thought BG was. And IMO HMRC certainly won't budge on anything before the Loan Charge hits in a few months time. The LC is a nasty piece of horrible, retrospective taxation that is outrageous, but it appears to have us completely over a barrel (you either settle via CLSO2 or pay the LC) - unless someone (come on LCAG) can get it cancelled, but as people have said that will also take a change of law, can that be done in a few months? I have no idea.

[webberg]

I'm not sure if all the posters above are in BG. I know are but not if all are.

We have no illusions about the size of the task, the implications of winning/losing or the risks that we are asking people to accept. We take great pains to explain all of this and to manage expectations.

We may eventually be wrong and our views may be rejected by a Court. All members know that and wherever possible we take steps to mitigate the potential downsides.

We are honest with our members and try to maintain a professional approach and objective analysis at all times.

We are committed to the path we are on. We will not be bullied or intimated or deflected by HMRC or promoters or advisers (so wise after the event). We will throw everything we have at this issue and leave nothing on the track.

If that is not good enough, or people are not conviced it will be good enough, there is no compulsion to join BG. Its voluntary to join. No penalty for leaving. No penalty for re-joining.

It's not to everybody's taste and we do find that the (very few) who have joined and decided not to stay as they want the group to work for them and not for all, are happier on their own. As has been remarked however taking the enquiry on as an individual is hard yards.

[bearxxv]

Advice needed please!

Hi All,

Apologies if this question has already been asked and answered but I have spent hours reading through the forum looking and haven't found anything which may be relevant.

I am aware the loan charge will affect anyone who used an EBT - is this the same for anyone who used a remuneration trust via a Ltd company (Ltd Company pays trust and trust pays individual minus fees)?

The trust promoter continues to argue with HMRC in correspondence to open enquiries into my Ltd company (via me) and the latest response from HMRC is to suggest contacting them to settle tax affairs under the disguised remuneration settlement terms, of which the trust promoter has advised me against as they intend to provide support to all open enquiries.

I am no longer using the trust (they are still supporting open enquiries) and would like some advice as I am considering contacting HMRC to request settlement terms as I believe this would be less painful to bare than the loan charge.

Thanks

[Delendog]

Hi All,

Apologies if this question has already been asked and answered but I have spent hours reading through the forum looking and haven't found anything which may be relevant.

I am aware the loan charge will affect anyone who used an EBT - is this the same for anyone who used a remuneration trust via a Ltd company (Ltd Company pays trust and trust pays individual minus fees)?

The trust promoter continues to argue with HMRC in correspondence to open enquiries into my Ltd company (via me) and the latest response from HMRC is to suggest contacting them to settle tax affairs under the disguised remuneration settlement terms, of which the trust promoter has advised me against as they intend to provide support to all open enquiries.

I am no longer using the trust (they are still supporting open enquiries) and would like some advice as I am considering contacting HMRC to request settlement terms as I believe this would be less painful to bare than the loan charge.

Thanks

Sounds like the same one i used. I am requesting settlement figures from HMRC - don;t have to sign it but it leaves options open. Have you asked the provider if they will pay your tax if they are wrong? I know the answer.

[chrisl]

Declare in Tax Return or not?

I am about to complete a late Tax Return for 16/17 for someone who had a contractor loan with SmartPay.
The person has a late Return to file as well as a standard contractor loan charge letter.

What is not clear and what i cannot get from HMRC is if the person should enter details of the loan on the Tax Return itself and pay tax via self-assessment, or leave it off the Return and speak to HMRC about settling directly with them via the loan charge letter.

It seems if they settle directly they could have 5 years to pay but i assume this wont be the case if the loans are put as income in the Tax Return as they will want the money immediately.
When phoning the general HMRC phoneline they tell you to put the loans as other income on the Return however i am not convinced this is the correct way to go.

Has anyone done it one way or the other?