NTRT give HMRC a bloody nose

[GammaMadrid]

So who do we want to win?

TAA, which also means LC will be lost.

Or HMRC, which means the end of IR35.

Toughie.....

[QUODM]

eh?

I've definately missed something here - can someone tell me why this NTRT judgement affects the LC and not just DTA and what TAA is? If you can point me to another thread great. thx
The win seems to have just been on some semantic points of procedure that caused a reversal of FN/APN but not HMRCs entire case?

[GammaMadrid]

I've definately missed something here - can someone tell me why this NTRT judgement affects the LC and not just DTA and what TAA is? If you can point me to another thread great. thx
The win seems to have just been on some semantic points of procedure that caused a reversal of FN/APN but not HMRCs entire case?

https://forums.contractoruk.com/acco...58-fa2008.html

This latest case(the JR) was not just semantic points of procedure - it blew apart HMRC FN/APN strategy. HMRC landed a couple of minor blows - but were knocked out and will never fight again.

You are right though, the main case goes on. HMRC continue to be dragged kicking and screaming towards FTTT trying everything they can not to get there. In settling with George, they conceded IR35 applies in very few cases. In effect, TAA are fighting for IR35 to be applied. HMRC are fighting against IR35!

[Groundhogdays]

https://forums.contractoruk.com/acco...58-fa2008.html

This latest case(the JR) was not just semantic points of procedure - it blew apart HMRC FN/APN strategy. HMRC landed a couple of minor blows - but were knocked out and will never fight again.

You are right though, the main case goes on. HMRC continue to be dragged kicking and screaming towards FTTT trying everything they can not to get there. In settling with George, they conceded IR35 applies in very few cases. In effect, TAA are fighting for IR35 to be applied. HMRC are fighting against IR35!

Right. If only it was the Loan Charge being blown out of the water, but one fears that will come too late for so many. What are the chances?

[starstruck]

https://forums.contractoruk.com/acco...58-fa2008.html

This latest case(the JR) was not just semantic points of procedure - it blew apart HMRC FN/APN strategy. HMRC landed a couple of minor blows - but were knocked out and will never fight again.

You are right though, the main case goes on. HMRC continue to be dragged kicking and screaming towards FTTT trying everything they can not to get there. In settling with George, they conceded IR35 applies in very few cases. In effect, TAA are fighting for IR35 to be applied. HMRC are fighting against IR35!

Have I understood this correctly? TAA (the contractors) are claiming they were disguised employees and IR35 should apply, rather than the retrospective tax on their scheme, which I assume is heavy. HMRC are claiming IR35 should not apply in an attempt to get the big retrospective tax. Why would a TAA win mean LC lost, I don't follow this, in what sense lost? Also why would an HMRC win stop IR35 (I guess because people could then use HMRCs own arguments from this case that IR35 doesn't apply as reasons for why it doesn't apply to them going forward? Interesting...).

[washed up contractor]

Being pedantic.

A UTTT decision is not necessarily binding.

My guess is that even if HMRC lose at UTT then they will appeal to CoA and the Supreme Court, precisely because they cannot afford to lose.

Sadly, even if they lose (and I think they will), and do not collect the money that they have promised spreadsheet Phil and also lose the loan charge to a JR, the architects of the plan in HMRC will brush off the millions in wasted money and damage to reputation and will still collect the nice pension and the gong in due course.

Sorry, but once again you show your lack of knowledge (which should be a concern to anyone using your scheme to fight HMRC).

UTTT decisions are binding as they set a precedent unlike FTTTs that do not. The decision of a UTTT is appeallable only on a point of law. And, if that is shown to be sustained then the decision is set aside.

[washed up contractor]

So who do we want to win?

TAA, which also means LC will be lost.

Or HMRC, which means the end of IR35.

Toughie.....

You're talking rubbish. The NTRT FTT (and UTT if it gets that far) has no impact on the Loan Charge. Neither is it about IR35 which is another misunderstanding on your part. Even if the group win even at UTT it will not weaken HMRC's IR35 strategy because the case does not attack IR35 principles.

[GammaMadrid]

Have I understood this correctly? TAA (the contractors) are claiming they were disguised employees and IR35 should apply, rather than the retrospective tax on their scheme, which I assume is heavy. HMRC are claiming IR35 should not apply in an attempt to get the big retrospective tax. Why would a TAA win mean LC lost, I don't follow this, in what sense lost?

A TAA win would help the LC. It means the employers are liable. Like the Rangers case.

Also why would an HMRC win stop IR35 (I guess because people could then use HMRCs own arguments from this case that IR35 doesn't apply as reasons for why it doesn't apply to them going forward? Interesting...).

You guess correctly.

[GammaMadrid]

Sorry, but once again you show your lack of knowledge (which should be a concern to anyone using your scheme to fight HMRC).

UTTT decisions are binding as they set a precedent unlike FTTTs that do not. The decision of a UTTT is appeallable only on a point of law. And, if that is shown to be sustained then the decision is set aside.

You're talking rubbish. The NTRT FTT (and UTT if it gets that far) has no impact on the Loan Charge. Neither is it about IR35 which is another misunderstanding on your part. Even if the group win even at UTT it will not weaken HMRC's IR35 strategy because the case does not attack IR35 principles.

Webberg was quite correct to correct me. And I stand by my earlier post.

I did type out a reply to you. But have deleted it. If you have a point to make - make it. If you want to hurl personal insults, or insults of any type, head over to the bear pit(aka general) and join the rest of the, well I won't say what they are as I don't want to be dragged down to your level.

[Calmbeforethestorm]

Webberg was quite correct to correct me. And I stand by my earlier post.

I did type out a reply to you. But have deleted it. If you have a point to make - make it. If you want to hurl personal insults, or insults of any type, head over to the bear pit(aka general) and join the rest of the, well I won't say what they are as I don't want to be dragged down to your level.

Perhaps one of the resident experts could clarify?