Tax avoiders to be deliberately bankrupted.....?..
Discussion
Over the years I have heard people bragging about the silly things they have done regarding claiming as much back as they can. I am not one of those people, always played by the rules.
Genuine question. How would it have mattered if the fuel receipts etc had been used rather than the public transport way. The receipts did not add up to anything stupid, probably the same amount as if I had used the car for work.
At one point she said using public transport could add up to about £700, oh good, that sounds nice. The amount she actually got was less than half that.
If anything she prompted me into stretching it out a bit 'you must have a uniform to wash' (no just overalls), 'but if you had a uniform you could claim for washing it'. Right, ok, I have a uniform.
'What about tools?' (anything consumable is provided by the employer, very rarely do I have to buy new tools). 'Oh you must have bought something, we will put down £xxx.'
'Paper and printing,how much have you done? (hardly any, I work in a mechanical job, not an office). 'We will put down something.'
I never even considered claiming for washing clothes, printing off the odd timesheet etc etc, all I was bothered about and have only ever been bothered about in past years has been travelling expenses an the odd bigger item. I bought a new drill one year and claimed for that.
So like I said what difference would it have made if she had claimed the receipts instead of the public transport?
Genuine question. How would it have mattered if the fuel receipts etc had been used rather than the public transport way. The receipts did not add up to anything stupid, probably the same amount as if I had used the car for work.
At one point she said using public transport could add up to about £700, oh good, that sounds nice. The amount she actually got was less than half that.
If anything she prompted me into stretching it out a bit 'you must have a uniform to wash' (no just overalls), 'but if you had a uniform you could claim for washing it'. Right, ok, I have a uniform.
'What about tools?' (anything consumable is provided by the employer, very rarely do I have to buy new tools). 'Oh you must have bought something, we will put down £xxx.'
'Paper and printing,how much have you done? (hardly any, I work in a mechanical job, not an office). 'We will put down something.'
I never even considered claiming for washing clothes, printing off the odd timesheet etc etc, all I was bothered about and have only ever been bothered about in past years has been travelling expenses an the odd bigger item. I bought a new drill one year and claimed for that.
So like I said what difference would it have made if she had claimed the receipts instead of the public transport?
everyeggabird said:
Over the years I have heard people bragging about the silly things they have done regarding claiming as much back as they can. I am not one of those people, always played by the rules.
Genuine question. How would it have mattered if the fuel receipts etc had been used rather than the public transport way. The receipts did not add up to anything stupid, probably the same amount as if I had used the car for work.
At one point she said using public transport could add up to about £700, oh good, that sounds nice. The amount she actually got was less than half that.
If anything she prompted me into stretching it out a bit 'you must have a uniform to wash' (no just overalls), 'but if you had a uniform you could claim for washing it'. Right, ok, I have a uniform.
'What about tools?' (anything consumable is provided by the employer, very rarely do I have to buy new tools). 'Oh you must have bought something, we will put down £xxx.'
'Paper and printing,how much have you done? (hardly any, I work in a mechanical job, not an office). 'We will put down something.'
I never even considered claiming for washing clothes, printing off the odd timesheet etc etc, all I was bothered about and have only ever been bothered about in past years has been travelling expenses an the odd bigger item. I bought a new drill one year and claimed for that.
So like I said what difference would it have made if she had claimed the receipts instead of the public transport?
That would be fraud, as explained above.Genuine question. How would it have mattered if the fuel receipts etc had been used rather than the public transport way. The receipts did not add up to anything stupid, probably the same amount as if I had used the car for work.
At one point she said using public transport could add up to about £700, oh good, that sounds nice. The amount she actually got was less than half that.
If anything she prompted me into stretching it out a bit 'you must have a uniform to wash' (no just overalls), 'but if you had a uniform you could claim for washing it'. Right, ok, I have a uniform.
'What about tools?' (anything consumable is provided by the employer, very rarely do I have to buy new tools). 'Oh you must have bought something, we will put down £xxx.'
'Paper and printing,how much have you done? (hardly any, I work in a mechanical job, not an office). 'We will put down something.'
I never even considered claiming for washing clothes, printing off the odd timesheet etc etc, all I was bothered about and have only ever been bothered about in past years has been travelling expenses an the odd bigger item. I bought a new drill one year and claimed for that.
So like I said what difference would it have made if she had claimed the receipts instead of the public transport?
everyeggabird said:
Over the years I have heard people bragging about the silly things they have done regarding claiming as much back as they can. I am not one of those people, always played by the rules.
I had a conversation in 2007 with someone that was telling myself and friend how he paid hardly any money to the taxman. He was using an isle of man tax avoidance scheme and it was 100% legit, HMRC knew all about it and would we like to join and make tons of cash etc etc. At the time I thought it was a crock of s
t and that he would come unstuck. People that brag about how much money they have or how they tricked the taxman either have no money or get caught. sidicks said:
Avoid or evade?
The word used here http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/0/at-a-glance-key-... is avoid, but I take your point.gooner1 said:
sidicks said:
Avoid or evade?
The word used here http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/0/at-a-glance-key-... is avoid, but I take your point.
sugerbear said:
I had a conversation in 2007 with someone that was telling myself and friend how he paid hardly any money to the taxman. He was using an isle of man tax avoidance scheme and it was 100% legit, HMRC knew all about it and would we like to join and make tons of cash etc etc.
At the time I thought it was a crock of st and that he would come unstuck. People that brag about how much money they have or how they tricked the taxman either have no money or get caught.
This will be one of the many forgiveness schemes around at the time.At the time I thought it was a crock of s
t and that he would come unstuck. People that brag about how much money they have or how they tricked the taxman either have no money or get caught. When he said HMRC accepted the scheme he meant he had informed them he was part of an avoidance scheme and they had taken no action so far.
I know a contractor who used the scheme big time. Last time I spoke to him he was the proud owner of assessments covering several years all demanding £50k odd in tax.
Mrr T said:
sugerbear said:
I had a conversation in 2007 with someone that was telling myself and friend how he paid hardly any money to the taxman. He was using an isle of man tax avoidance scheme and it was 100% legit, HMRC knew all about it and would we like to join and make tons of cash etc etc.
At the time I thought it was a crock of st and that he would come unstuck. People that brag about how much money they have or how they tricked the taxman either have no money or get caught.
This will be one of the many forgiveness schemes around at the time.At the time I thought it was a crock of s
t and that he would come unstuck. People that brag about how much money they have or how they tricked the taxman either have no money or get caught. When he said HMRC accepted the scheme he meant he had informed them he was part of an avoidance scheme and they had taken no action so far.
I know a contractor who used the scheme big time. Last time I spoke to him he was the proud owner of assessments covering several years all demanding £50k odd in tax.
A lot of the IoM avoidance schemes that pay people using an 'EBT' where chased by HMRC as soon as they changed the legislation and were allowed to issue 'Accelerated Payment Notices. This meant that if you used an avoidance scheme and HMRC had done their discovery work, they can literally just think of a number and then tell you that's how much they think you 'may' owe them. There is no right to appeal and you have 90 days to pay it and maybe one day in the future if it's proved you don't owe them anything, you'll possibly get it back. It really is a case of guilty until proven innocent. If they can't get you that way, they'll retrospectively change the law and make doing what you were doing at the time illegal and they'll come knocking.
I've on occasion paid cash for things like car repairs etc, but I'd never condone the use of any avoidance scheme, they'll get you in the end!
Welshbeef said:
fblm said:
Saint Bob not 'paying his fair share'? Surely not.
Didn't he (and a few other pop stars) demand that our govt bring in loads of Syrian families and he would let them live in his south west house while he lived in his London flat. He didn't live up to that claim at all in fact nor did anyony else.
Had he done so and continued to do so then I'd have a fair amount of respect for him however he BS all the time and now it turns out he is one of many wealthy not paying towards the poorest in our country .....
. You know when he's lying, his lips move 
Granfondo said:
When the scheme is being pushed by some poncy "financial" firm its avoid but to honest people it's evade!
IME there's nothing poncy about the firms pushing these 'wealth management solutions'. They are a bunch of slippery shysters who'd be running ponzi schemes, carousel frauds or selling time shares if they didn't have a 'legitimate' job selling sketchy avoidance schemes.fblm said:
Granfondo said:
When the scheme is being pushed by some poncy "financial" firm its avoid but to honest people it's evade!
IME there's nothing poncy about the firms pushing these 'wealth management solutions'. They are a bunch of slippery shysters who'd be running ponzi schemes, carousel frauds or selling time shares if they didn't have a 'legitimate' job selling sketchy avoidance schemes.sugerbear said:
I had a conversation in 2007 with someone that was telling myself and friend how he paid hardly any money to the taxman. He was using an isle of man tax avoidance scheme and it was 100% legit, HMRC knew all about it and would we like to join and make tons of cash etc etc.
I know of a couple of contractors on the "umbrella company pays you via a loan that you never repay - giving you in effect 85% take home" scheme. Apparently one of them has been had HMRC at their door two or three times - but they have simply gone away when this person provided them with the paper work they asked for.
Not sure how these people are getting away with it - but they do appear to be at the moment and have been for a number of years.
Moonhawk said:
I know of a couple of contractors on the "umbrella company pays you via a loan that you never repay - giving you in effect 85% take home" scheme.
Apparently one of them has been had HMRC at their door two or three times - but they have simply gone away when this person provided them with the paper work they asked for.
Not sure how these people are getting away with it - but they do appear to be at the moment and have been for a number of years.
What happens when the umbrella firm goes into admin and the liquidator sells the debt to me?Apparently one of them has been had HMRC at their door two or three times - but they have simply gone away when this person provided them with the paper work they asked for.
Not sure how these people are getting away with it - but they do appear to be at the moment and have been for a number of years.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff