Legal Challenge v Loan Charge

[Joolsey86]

There is no question mark false stop. NICs are
Excluded for CLSO2.

[RickG]

There is no question mark false stop. NICs are
Excluded for CLSO2.

I don't believe this is correct.

My understanding is that NICs are included for those who were self employed (class 4) and for those where the company still exists (class 1). In some cases, employer NICs may also be payable. Best to speak to a tax advisor to establish your own circumstances.

EDIT - the above is specifically for CLSO2. I'm unsure about LC19.

[Groundhogdays]

I don't believe this is correct.

My understanding is that NICs are included for those who were self employed (class 4) and for those where the company still exists (class 1). In some cases, employer NICs may also be payable. Best to speak to a tax advisor to establish your own circumstances.

EDIT - the above is specifically for CLSO2. I'm unsure about LC19.

Good. It is equally useful to have more context in order to work out when one in the clear, as to be shown when you're in the crosshairs.

Every advice has to be filtered through the lens of which scheme(s) involved, loan structure, employed or self-employed, current loan status, how old, open or closed years, and even where other existing legislation may be applicable, not just LC.

Having been self-employed may not be a factor for NIC inclusion if the loan is older than seven years. Not sure about the context of the company still being open.

Loan charge is an odd thing - why do I still get the feeling HMRC are winging it and inventing the rules and interpretation as they go along. How do you deal with that?!

[ChimpMaster]

Hi Phil, do you have any update on this Legal Challenge that you are able to share with us here or via DSW?

[QUODM]

Loan charge gives info for investigations...

I haven't seen this discussed on other forums (and not sure if this is the right thread - apols if not) but it seems to me that by declaring the loan info for last 20 years, HMRC just get info they never had before and will just open investigations into every year possible.

I worried that this is connected with the new proposed idea of 12y time limit change planned for their next finance bill and this is part of their next prong once they had the info, then open up more retrospective investigations but it appears that is going forward (with some year 2019 (?... maybe) being a locked year that will be open for 6,7,8...12 years going forward) and won't open up 6 prev years (pre 2013 e.g.) that were otherwise closed. (again if I read the legislation correctly...)

I've been told that some scheme providers claim that their loans are not reportable under the loan charge (although I don't know details) but seems entirely possible (even if you don't trust PTS and the like). Seems that legally not having to declare loans would be of great protection from this secondary attack.

Anyone have any thoughts on this?

[malvolio]

Are you interested in protecting the back taxes you (possibly) now owe or continuing to use tax minimisation schemes...?

[GammaMadrid]

Are you interested in protecting the back taxes you (possibly) now owe or continuing to use tax minimisation schemes...?

The interest is in stopping retrospection. Alot of users thought they were using a genuine umbrella - so the scheme promoters will be targeted too. Which is what HMRC should be doing.

[malvolio]

The interest is in stopping retrospection. Alot of users thought they were using a genuine umbrella - so the scheme promoters will be targeted too. Which is what HMRC should be doing.

I know yours is. That wasn't what I asked.

[QUODM]

you talking to me?...

I know yours is. That wasn't what I asked.

not sure if your question was to me but HMRC are out of time for a lot of 6y old investigations but the LC gives them massive access to info for 20 years that they didn't have before and it just seems to me that they'll look at the info (they otherwise wouldn't have obtained legally but scooped up now with the extraordinary LC2019 declarations) and open investigations on anything interesting.
Add a new 12 year scope for investigations and a lot of closed tax is now up for grabs.
That seems like a secondary negative aspect of the LC that noone seems to have discussed.

I think you would be mad to use a scheme these days given the HMRC's massive power grab and general lies to parliament (even though I still believe the rules should be the rules and if you want to bend them so be it) but I am interested in not reopening things that I think were legal at the time and I think are closed now. At some point even if I have to repay a lot of money Id like to end this and move on with my life, not get older and older investigations added.
Do my summer jobs as a kid get added to this as I'm sure I didn't pay the right tax there...

[CapitalP]

Which QC is being used?