header-logo header-logo

Taxing matters

04 September 2009 / Peter Vaines
Issue: 7383 / Categories: Features , Tax
printer mail-detail

Peter Vaines foresees that putting a foot wrong could land taxpayers in trouble

Everyone will remember the amnesty a couple of years ago where people were encouraged to disclose unreported income and accept to a mitigated penalty. Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs (HMRC) did not like it being called an amnesty. It preferred the term “offshore disclosure facility”. Those who failed to disclose under this amnesty were going to be subject to investigations which would be “intrusive and thorough”. Well, nearly. In the Budget, Mr Darling announced that those who did not come clean before will be given another opportunity to do so—I wonder what happened to all the intrusive and thorough stuff. All they now say is that they “will pursue those who do not disclose”.

Details of the new amnesty have now been announced—this one is called the New Disclosure Opportunity. You have to smile. Picture the scene. Man in balaclava goes into bank and says to cashier: “See this gun? I would like to allow you an opportunity ….” Anyway, this new amnesty

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll