HMRC Granted Leave to Appeal UTT Decision

[Frankie 8,562]

From Richard Wilson:

 

HMRC granted leave to appeal upper tier tribunal decision at the Court of Session.

 

"We are pleased that the Upper Tribunal has given HMRC leave to appeal to the Court of Session," said a spokesman.

 

"We continue to believe that schemes using Employee Benefit Trusts to avoid income tax and NICs do not work.'

[Zappa 0]

Not surprised by this, but getting increasingly disgusted by it as the waste of time, money & resources by HMRC and their relentless appeals is ridiculous.

[Rangersitis 0]

Not surprised by this, but getting increasingly disgusted by it as the waste of time, money & resources by HMRC and their relentless appeals is ridiculous.

 

HMRC will take the view that the amounts spent on appeals will be small change if they ultimately get the decision that they seek. They would be able to claw back millions.

[pmu 0]

HMRC will take the view that the amounts spent on appeals will be small change if they ultimately get the decision that they seek. They would be able to claw back millions.

 

Do you mean claw back millions from other offenders due to the precedent that would be set or from Rangers? My understanding is that there is not much millions left to be clawed back!

[Rangersitis 0]

Do you mean claw back millions from other offenders due to the precedent that would be set or from Rangers? My understanding is that there is not much millions left to be clawed back!

 

Just in general.

[barca72 440]

From Richard Wilson:

 

HMRC granted leave to appeal upper tier tribunal decision at the Court of Session.

 

"We are pleased that the Upper Tribunal has given HMRC leave to appeal to the Court of Session," said a spokesman.

 

"We continue to believe that schemes using Employee Benefit Trusts to avoid income tax and NICs do not work.'

 

As I understand it, they require to convince the Judge that they can appeal on a point of law. Which point of law can possibly not have been covered by now?

[Crimson Dynamo 128]

Forgive my ignorance but do you not need to present new evidence to appeal?

[der Berliner 3,744]

Maybe I am mistaken, but this is essentially about HMRC vs MIH employees and Murray family stuff now, rather than with the "big tax case" that they chased initially? Does that now go to a tribunal/judge outwith Scotland?

[True_Ger_1872 2]

How can they then go back and try to get monies back from others? Was the scheme not judged to be legal at the time (or shall we say, not illegal) and as such - they cant really backdate penalties based on changes to law??

[der Berliner 3,744]

No, the first decision essentially stands. We adressed a few of the EBTs wrongly, but hardly all the money they were looking for. Two judges have upheld that, the latter one only questioned some stuff about MIH people and Murray family folk. Would have to check out a similar FF thread on this, as you can get enough info out of there to get a reasonable picture. No matter the decision, it won't have any affect on Rangers FC as it is. Then again, you would have to read any appeal papers handed in by HMRC to see what they are actually looking for here.

 

HMRC granted leave to appeal Oldco Rangers 'big tax case' ruling

 

The taxman has been granted leave from the courts to appeal the Oldco Rangers "big tax case" ruling.

 

Last month, the taxman lost an appeal against the Rangers "big tax case" verdict after a ruling by a High Court judge.

 

Lord Doherty, in most part, dismissed HM Revenue and Customs appeal against the verdict.

 

In 2012 a First Tier Tax Tribunal ruled payments made to some Rangers players through EBT trusts were loans.

 

The three-person First Tier Tax Tribunal could not reach an unanimous decision on the club's use of Employee Benefit Trusts between 2001 and 2010.

 

It found most of the trusts were "valid" and loans are "recoverable" by the trust, although it conceded some advances to players were taxable and any bill is likely to be "substantially reduced" from the initial £46.2m assessment.

 

On Wednesday, a spokesman for HMRC confirmed it had been granted permission to appeal the court judgment.

 

He added: "HMRC continues to believe that schemes using Employee Benefit Trusts to avoid tax do not work. We have applied for permission to appeal the case to the Court of Session.

 

"Around 700 users of EBT schemes have already settled with us resulting in around £800m of tax and NICs being paid. We expect more to settle in the near future.

 

"These are avoidance schemes and we will continue to tackle those who do not pay up. It is not right that a small minority can avoid paying what they owe while the vast majority pay the right tax on their earnings. This case represents an important principle.

 

"HMRC is proud of our record of winning around 80% of cases that are taken to litigation by the taxpayer. We tackle avoidance wherever we see it and litigate where necessary to ensure schemes are defeated and the tax due is paid."

 

Lord Docherty's written ruling, which has no impact on the current Rangers regime, reads: "The appeal is dismissed except in so far as it relates to the termination payments.

 

"I shall remit the case to the FTT (i) with a direction to allow the taxpayers' appeals against the assessments relating to the payments to the sub-trusts of Sir David Murray, his sons, Mr McClelland and Mr MacMillan; (ii) to proceed as accords in relation to the termination payments, the payments in respect of guaranteed bonuses, and any related questions of grossing up.

 

"Standing my findings and my disposal, the remit should be to the FTT as originally constituted."

 

STV

 

A cynic might add: some comfort for the much violated Yahoo soul this week.