Registering Tax Avoidance schemes

Registering Tax Avoidance schemes

Author
Discussion

cbemoore

Original Poster:

21 posts

255 months

Wednesday 17th March 2004
quotequote all

Just read the budget summary:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3519852.stm

Evidently "Accountancy firms will have to register tax avoidance schemes with the Inland Revenue.".

So now they're not allowed to help us avoid tax (even though its perfectly legal) unless they get permission first!!

How the hell is that going to work??

Size Nine Elm

5,167 posts

290 months

Wednesday 17th March 2004
quotequote all
From www.thetrade-world.com

...
A few call it selfish, a few more call it immoral, but we and the overwhelming majority call tax avoidance - not tax evasion - good planning. Indeed several renowned British Law Lords and US Senators have gone on record in the past stating that:

"It is ever man's duty to arrange his affairs to pay the least possible tax he legally can."

. Mind you, those same peers have also gone on record to say:

"It is also the Government's duty to ensure that it collects the maximum tax it legally can."

It is our opinion, and that of many like minded individuals throughout the world, that, whilst we must pay lip service to that word 'legally', Governments have exceeded their democratic duties by so wide a margin that "it is every man's duty to arrange his life to both pay the least possible tax he can and to minimise his Government's intrusion in to his private affairs".

dimmadan

701 posts

269 months

Thursday 18th March 2004
quotequote all
cbemoore said:


Evidently "Accountancy firms will have to register tax avoidance schemes with the Inland Revenue.".


does this it means its law or voluntary?

Is this an admittance that the gov cant keep up, so they must help by informing the gov what they're up to they can close the loopholes ?

eric mc

122,699 posts

271 months

Thursday 18th March 2004
quotequote all
In my mind it's just the IR getting to see tax avoidance schemes BEFORE they are put into effect rather than AFTER, It's much better to have a scheme stopped before a client has "avoided" a load of tax only to find they have to pay it all back, with interest and penalties, five years down the line.

JonRB

75,693 posts

278 months

Thursday 18th March 2004
quotequote all
I've knocked around with contractors whose accountants sail so close to the wind they should be in the Olympic Sailing Team. And every one of them has been a nervous character looking over their shoulder waiting for an investigation.

My accountant tends to be a little more cautious, perhaps too much so, but he has a good reputation with the IR and his clients are rarely investigated. I haven't been in 4.5 years of trading.

I think it is going to be interesting to see how this one pans out. It could actually bring some stability to accountancy as it could remove some of the uncertainty of whether or not a mitigation scheme is going to be successful or not.

>> Edited by JonRB on Thursday 18th March 21:01