H M Revenue & Customs TAX Ruling

[pipetracker]

A couple of things have occured to me.

1. If you have a statement from HMRC saying in nice big letters at the top of the page ‘You have nothing to pay’ what does that really mean and is it worth the paper it’s written on??

2. If you been audited by HMRC during the last few years and passed OK then surely that must set a precedent for how they interpreted the rules themselves.

Sorry if I’m stating the bleeding obvious here and I’m sure someone will be along to piss on my chips soon enough with some suitable reasons.

[luckyjim37]

I really was not ever going to post on this site again but I am really annoyed reading through this and also with that stupid poll.

Firstly the Poll. What about an answer that reads "Some people will do nothing not complain and pay a fair amount of tax like they always do due to not claiming SED due to either not doing enough days, working on rigs or it not being worth the hassle for a couple of grand".

[1. If you have a statement from HMRC saying in nice big letters at the top of the page ‘You have nothing to pay’ what does that really mean and is it worth the paper it’s written on?? ]

If HMRC have said in writing that you have nothing to pay then you have nothing to pay unless they can at at a later date prove you have defrauded them in some way otherwise you would have a very strong legal case to fight them in court.

Or just go Ltd company and reduce your tax burden to a reasonable amount.

Also Neil wrote.

“Tomorrow (29th Sept) I’m off down to Doncaster to be "trained" in RMT branch procedures etc. They know not what they do! But there I’ll get the chance to have an in depth chat with Jake Molloy, and get some details straight about this tax debacle, and his opinion on what can be done now. I passed on a letter that I received about this issue from an RMT member in ROV, to Jake and our local in house solicitor. But she says she doesn’t have the specialised knowledge to deal with an issue like this. Presumably we can hire someone who does if it seems that there is some point, or some opportunity to pursue a legal challenge. I just don’t know. But I will find out and keep you informed.
What I do know is,that if there is any "solution", it lies with you yourselves. There’s been a steady flow, if not exactly a deluge, of guys transferring into the OILC branch.

I may be missing the point here but what is the point of an oil uni0n which is claiming to be ROV orientated or at least on our side when it does not have a solicitor who is specialist in the kind of legal issues which are affecting us. And also what kind of message does it send out stating that the solution lies with ourselves when we are supposed to join the uni0n to fight our fights for us. I think that qualifies as a mixed message at the very least.

SED is great don’t get me wrong I have never claimed it for one reason or another but I know of far to many guys who are dependant on it and do not see it as a tax perk which is what in reality it is.

Maybe the government is not aware of how big a deal this issue is and I hope all the petition signing works for all the guys it affects. But I do also wonder how much of a storm in a tea cup this all really is.

The industry reality is that if it is messed around with and everyone leaves the UK sector then other sectors will be flooded with workers who will then struggle to get enough work and many will return as they cannot afford not to.

[Aidan Karley]

A couple of things have occured to me.
1. If you have a statement from HMRC saying in nice big letters at the top of the page ‘You have nothing to pay’ what does that really mean and is it worth the paper it’s written on??

Such a letter should have a date on it, which means that it’s correct in what it says : on that date, under the rule interpretations in force at that time, you had nothing to pay. On a different date, under the different rule interpretations in force at that different date (even if interpreted by the same assessor), you may or may not have anything to pay.
Much of the protest about this tax move seems, to my limited understanding of it, to be focussing on the imposition of taxation. However, some of the more perceptive commentators have noticed the really dangerous precedent that they’re trying to slip in is "retrospective taxation" – changing the rules today so that what you did in the past is now taxable.
This is government : they make the rules. So, unless the courts slap them down (cue stage left, the start of a 15-year, multi-million pound series of cases ; during those 15 years, the wise man will have to safely invest sums to cover his tax liability if the cases, and appeals, fail. So you effectively lose the choice of what to do with the money anyway. Meanwhile, the lawyers make a killing.), then the government’s rules are what matters.
Of course, you can always try to change the government.

2. If you been audited by HMRC during the last few years and passed OK then surely that must set a precedent for how they interpreted the rules themselves.

Same question ; same answer. The taxmen can change their opinions and interpretations as they want to, unless forced otherwise by the courts.

Sorry if I’m stating the bleeding obvious here and I’m sure someone will be along to piss on my chips soon enough with some suitable reasons.

I am not a lawyer ; but I think that’s a reasonable description of the way the tax-man’s lawyers will argue. If the taxman wants to establish precedent for introduction of retrospective taxation this year, on the SED case, then next year they’ll be raiding everyone else’s pockets for this year’s money.

[pipetracker]

A couple of things have occured to me.
1. If you have a statement from HMRC saying in nice big letters at the top of the page ‘You have nothing to pay’ what does that really mean and is it worth the paper it’s written on??

Such a letter should have a date on it, which means that it’s correct in what it says : on that date, under the rule interpretations in force at that time, you had nothing to pay. On a different date, under the different rule interpretations in force at that different date (even if interpreted by the same assessor), you may or may not have anything to pay.
Much of the protest about this tax move seems, to my limited understanding of it, to be focussing on the imposition of taxation. However, some of the more perceptive commentators have noticed the really dangerous precedent that they’re trying to slip in is "retrospective taxation" – changing the rules today so that what you did in the past is now taxable.
This is government : they make the rules. So, unless the courts slap them down (cue stage left, the start of a 15-year, multi-million pound series of cases ; during those 15 years, the wise man will have to safely invest sums to cover his tax liability if the cases, and appeals, fail. So you effectively lose the choice of what to do with the money anyway. Meanwhile, the lawyers make a killing.), then the government’s rules are what matters.
Of course, you can always try to change the government.

2. If you been audited by HMRC during the last few years and passed OK then surely that must set a precedent for how they interpreted the rules themselves.

Same question ; same answer. The taxmen can change their opinions and interpretations as they want to, unless forced otherwise by the courts.

Sorry if I’m stating the bleeding obvious here and I’m sure someone will be along to piss on my chips soon enough with some suitable reasons.

I am not a lawyer ; but I think that’s a reasonable description of the way the tax-man’s lawyers will argue. If the taxman wants to establish precedent for introduction of retrospective taxation this year, on the SED case, then next year they’ll be raiding everyone else’s pockets for this year’s money.

OK, so what your saying is that the Govt/HMRC are free to move the goalposts, including the introduction of retrospective taxation, whenever the feel like it (because they can) and we can only challenge this in a court of law. I think we already suspected this but how hard is it to get someone to tell us if the introduction of retrospective taxation is legal or not?

The letter I refer to is a Statement of Account which everyone should get. It would be interesting to hear if anybody has been audited after getting the statement.

[CheckoffsUglyRumor]

In response to OILC_Asst comment

then next year they’ll be raiding everyone else’s pockets for this year’s money.

As a country UK is near broke – in 2 years time, whoever is in government will be tapping us for even more tax to pay for Iraq and Iran – apparently there is always a time lag with military budgets.

So just remember who brought us into this swamp…and who is currently throwing even more money at it, as it is unlikely to be the people next voted into power. Will the next bunch of elected idiots about-turn or lead us deeper into the mire.

The question should be will you go expat to the sunshine this year, or wait 18 months when you are that much poorer.

Its a no brainer really…now where were those cheap Ryan Air seats?

[James McLauchlan]

I really was not ever going to post on this site again but I am really annoyed reading through this and also with that stupid poll.

You have a PM on it’s way from me. Please read and digest.

[mind-when-this-was-fields]

‘not being worth the hassle for a couple of grand’.

Firstly there is a bigger picture than just being about ROV guys claiming sed!!!
It seems the government can do what they want with regards to tax and the only way to stop is a very costly court case!!
So can anyone tell when they will stop??probably never !!!!
Something about tax and death……
Also I think most guys have actually claimed more than just a couple of grand….
If it was such a small sum you could work and extra week for that..

[ROV_Monkey]

Edited

[Bacaruda]

http://ukdivingbrotherhood.wordpress.com/2008/10/

[Andy Shiers]

Okay another question , Does this mean ALL DSV’s around the world or only the ones working in the faggots back yard ?
I.E if you work abroad does this then mean you are not on the spot ?

[mind-when-this-was-fields]

That will be the bigger picture:-))))))

[ROV_Monkey]

Okay another question , Does this mean ALL DSV’s around the world or only the ones working in the faggots back yard ?
I.E if you work abroad does this then mean you are not on the spot ?

No, This is applicable worldwide. If you are a UK National then it applies to you. The only way to avoid it is to be ExPat, i.e. 90 days max in UK with a foreign residence etc, I’m sure James can give you the full SP on what is reqd to be classed as ExPat, or Google is your friend

Monkey

[ROV_Monkey]

Just toying with an idea here but….

If enough people want to go ExPat…

If we clubbed together….bought a hotel or whatever in a sunny climate and registered it as our address, individual rooms etc, then it may well work out cheaper…

Just a thought

Run it past the accountant

Monkey

[dandydon]

whats the general feeling among the affected troops now this news has had time to sink in and people have had a chance to speak to their tax advisors,,?
is confidence high or low,, ?? personally i feel a bit helpless, contacted ma MP but its right frustrating all this sitting aboot n waiting to see what lies ahead,, surely someone will see sense and fight the corner..wouldna hold ma breath tho

[Aidan Karley]

The question should be will you go expat to the sunshine this year, or wait 18 months when you are that much poorer.

Not an option for me. The next step on the career ladder for me is into an office in Aberdeen and running several wells simultaneously. Plus, of course, the wife would have to start the joys of getting a settlement visa again, but this time for a country where she doesn’t even have a sponsor with residence rights.
Besides, who wants to go and melt somewhere? It’s bad enough being above 30 centigrade if someone is paying you, but to go somewhere and sweat voluntarily? Weird! <G>

[Author]

Posts