H M Revenue & Customs TAX Ruling

[Gamekeeper]

Still waiting………………….. Does anyone else have a draft copy of the guidance to post or PM?

[The consultation with HMCR is by invitation only.The unions, Subsea UK, Chamber of Shipping and a couple of the subsea contractors are involved in the review. ]

The "Subsea Contractors" involved in the consultations I assume are the same "Subsea Contractors" that now pay all their offshore staff via Singapore…….. maybe the HMRC are focusing their attentions on the wrong group…….. or maybe the consultation team are biased in some way shape or form…….

Moray, Are you still an Offshore employee or one of the invited few from the offices of the "Subsea Contractors"?? I wonder………

[Gamekeeper]

Still waiting………………….. Does anyone else have a draft copy of the guidance to post or PM?

[The consultation with HMCR is by invitation only. The unions, Subsea UK, Chamber of Shipping and a couple of the subsea contractors are involved in the review.]

The "Subsea Contractors" involved in the consultations I assume are the same "Subsea Contractors" that now pay all their offshore staff via Singapore…….. maybe the HMRC are focusing their attentions on the wrong group…….. or maybe the consultation team are biased in some way shape or form…….

Moray, Are you still an Offshore employee or one of the invited few from the offices of the "Subsea Contractors"?? I wonder………

[Moray]

Post deleted to avoid distractions

[Gamekeeper]

Moray,

If you take time to read my posts I am in no way shape or form attacking you, I only ask for clarification regarding your statements. I stand by my last post regarding the "Subsea Contractors" assisting the HMRC with their consultation as they ARE the same "Subsea Contractors" that pay their employees through Singapore. I also ask "friend or foe", you will know soon enough……..

I will not delete my posts because you are unhappy however I will offer to delete my posts if a "Draft Copy" of the guidance was made available to all on this board. Finally I can also confirm that I am in full time offshore employment at the sharp end of this issue & this issue certainly affects me & my colleagues…. over to you…..

[Gamekeeper]

No distractions, just answers required………

Edited: Moray, Thanks for your very informative PM, I’m not surprised you did not post similar content on this board…… however I believe you may be the one playing into their hands………. I’ll leave it at that.

[ROV_Monkey]

Gents,
Is this not a bit old news? This was out sometime last month. (Or was from RMT anyway)

Basically, if you don’t tie up to or work around a platform / installation for more than 5 days at a time then it’s no change….

HMRC was already viewing it at 3 days, it’s gone to 5, so if anything we gained on it.

Unless you’re a rigpig

Monkey

[Moray]

Monkey,

The point is its a one time event, sooner or later every construction vessel is going to be on a work location for 5 days.

It only needs to happen once, then the vessel will be classified as an offshore installation until scrapped or other permanent change of use.

This flies in the face of the stated position that ships were ships and rigs rigs, from the 15 October 2008 meeting, the challenge on the definition of work location etc may result in the final document being more helpful but as it stands, give it a couple of years tops and every diving and ROV boat except pipeline swimmers will be an installation.

[Gamekeeper]

& on & on & on………….

Lets wait for the official release of the guidance before we get too excited, only my opinion of course.

[Moray]

OK, fair enough, so lets see, we just wait and then try and do something about it when its too late for Parlimentary pressure to have any impact. The guidance is back dated !

Sounds like a great idea, knowing your going to crash but not even trying the brakes, lets just see if we hit the wall, any more like that ?

[Gamekeeper]

Given the guidance is going to be available in the next couple of weeks how much pressure do YOU think we will be able to apply NOW? From your earlier posts you have indicated it is as good as a done deal……. are you sure you are not an Office Waller or in fact the TAX Man himself?

[ROV_Monkey]

Moray,
Agrred, rules seem to be that if the boat does it once then it is non eligible until it "requalifies".

But let’s get real here, the marine crew know the score as well as us.

If you’re on a vessel thst is already eligible there is no way this ruling is going to change the way HMRC view the vessel.

We’ll just bimble out before the 5 day limit, then bimble back in again if we need to.

It’s a bit of a pain in the hoop, but given the way our DEAR LEADER needs as much money as he can get, then OK, I’ll jump through the hoop to qualify for it.

If it changes more however, there’s always France / Spain etc where you can still get 100% back and claim more.

Swings and roundabouts, at the mo tho UK as a place to reside is deffo on notice to cease and desist, (IMHO)

Monkey

[Gamekeeper]

Agreed Monkey

[Moray]

My MP was involved in the meeting with Stephen Timms, The Treasury Secretary so personnally I do believe in the power of democracy.

She had 4 constituents on our boat so was very helpful.

Making no effort is absolutely guaranteed to give no result.

However you never know, just taking two minutes to ask your MP, if he/she signed early day motion 2232 or going as far as spending 5 minutes asking for their support for British seafarers may have a positive outcome.

[Gamekeeper]

I think you are being very naive if you think that you are the only one lobbying your MP, however I believe the Guidance is going to be available very soon but personally I would prefer it to be available after the end of this tax year:D The question is: will any further lobbying do any good or are we wasting our time? Apparently the "Draft Guidance" is a done deal……

[Moray]

I don’t know when the comments have to be returned by, however I do know that if you read the link from Atholl Scott in my earlier post you will realise that the guidance itself will not be sufficient due to the legal issues which can ONLY be resolved by Parliament.

I.e. the guidance does not help as the law itself as now defined following the PSA judgement is against us. HMRC only interprete law, when the law does not reflect the wishes of Parliament, as in this case, our elected representatives input/support is required.

[Author]

Posts