Massive tax problem ... please help

elaine373

This seems pretty simple to me, if you had all accounts up to date and had kept all receipts and bills then this wouldnt be happening. I reckon you must have not been as careful as you should have been. This happened to some-one i know as well and still they are very lax with their book keeping and accounts.I do feel for you if you didnt earn what they are suggesting you did, but unless you can prove otherwise i think you will pay a heavy if not unfair price. I wish you well with this and hope you get some of your tax bill off.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/5153936.stm

schiff

QUOTE:
"They also offered no time to pay.
They weren't interested in looking at my lifestyle or any of my records.
They have deffo got it in for me".

I am beginning to be highly suspicious of this whole story and I suspect we might all have been wasting our time - time we have devoted out of kindness.

The Revenue will give time to pay if the alternative is bankruptcy, when they may get nothing. Unless they know you have more than the sum they are looking for.

They have an obligation to consider your lifestyle and look at your records. They can't refuse.

This might sound short of sympathy - though you've had plenty of that - but I conclude you've been having us on (motives hard to guess).

I am afraid that's me out.

WHA

schiff wrote:

I am beginning to be highly suspicious of this whole story and I suspect we might all have been wasting our time - time we have devoted out of kindness.This might sound short of sympathy - though you've had plenty of that - but I conclude you've been having us on (motives hard to guess).I am afraid that's me out.

My thoughts exactly! This just doesn't sound right at all.

wassup

I don't want to go into details on a public forum.

When I told them I was selling my house to pay the bill they said I didnt need any time and I should just pay right away.

I'm sorry if some of you think i'm making it up.... I'm not.

The year in question is 00/01... to try to break continuity between years I gave them accounts for 01/02 which showed changes to business activity and record keeping. Today at meeting we asked if they had looked at these and they said no. They then gave us the files back to take away, so they are not going to be looking at them either.

I took a diary from 04 with me today which details activity and asked for it to be taken into account. No they said. They said it should have been produced ages ago. But it was only about 4 weeks ago I learned that they were assuming profit levels for 7 years, including 04.

Todays meeting was to agree penalty level, so inspector was not interested in talking about anything else.

4nick8

If you clearly beleive you do not owe any further tax make an appointment to see your local MP who will take your case up with HMRC. Don't sign any letters of offer, (a binding contract to pay the tax,interest, and penalty) until it has been reviewed at a higher level. Believe me there are some maverick inspectors out there!

johnllew

Hmmm. You say the total tax (and I assume NIC) you owe is £45k, the interest is £12k and the total offer the HMRC are asking for is £78k? So the penalties must be £21k which you say are 60%? That's a big penalty and likely to reflect a lack of co-operation and/or disclosure.

If 60% = £21k, then the evaded duties must be £35k. That's a pretty large "error". If they are being "unfair" and demanding more than is due from an "innocent" person, I personally wouldn't accept it, but if your agent is suggesting you should and you were inclined to do so through lack of energy, I imagine there's more to this than meets the eye.

There should be some basis to the investigator's proposals; he would not want them tested before the Commissioners if there wasn't. If you really believe you are being treated unfairly, then argue your case before the Commissioners with decent representation.

wassup

John... the numbers are big because there was a large amount of cash unaccounted for, which i held my hands up to. But what the ir are doing is saying i earned it all in one year, which i didnt, it was earned over 3 years. So the make belief earnings for one year are huge, and then they have assumed it happened every years for 7 years, which is complete bollox.

The actual tax i should be paying is about 15k plus interest and penalty which wud be around 25k total.... they want 78k... thats the problem.

25 i can live with.... 78 is out of order

schiff

wassup

Back again, can't resist posting.

If the Inspector's claim that you have had 7 years of high-level income is to stand up, he would expect you to have assets to show this - a good level of savings, a posh house, posh car, second home abroad somewhere, expensive jewellery, etc.

Your post of 4/7 tells us you haven't and the Inspector must be forced to see all this. If he won't, approach his District Inspector or, as suggested above your MP - I think this is a great idea.

If you are not afraid to show all your bank accounts, credit card statements, house insurance policies (the jewellery), and have him come to your house to see for himself, why not do it?

I am upset you didn't take up my request to answer a few basic background questions a few days ago, which would have enabled us to form a better picture of things. In particular I am as frustrated as h..l about your accursed 'accountant', about whom we know absolutely nothing, except that he was introduced to you as an accountant, you think.

Please, please, please tell us more about him - you seem so attached to him; he's not your brother or your father is he!

schiff

Cook_County

It is clear from your last post that you have been poorly advised/represented.

HMRC do not have the power to demand to meet with you, if you have chosen to do so then you may well have inadvertantly said various things that have led HMRC to believe there is more involved.

This is why I said previously you need evidence. At this stage this will include the Inspector's notes of all meetings and correspondence on this topic.

There are two ways to play this - a fast settlement which is good for mental health and gets the Inspector some brownie points; or a slow game where you attack and wear down HMRC on every point they have got wrong.

If you want a fast game then I would go to the Commissioners now seeking closure. If you go and explain then you may well find them sympathetic. However the Inspector may win. This is big gamble.

I still think you need an investigation specialist who will doubtless cost you some £5k to £10k - it is only a shame you did not get decent advice at the outset as this would have saved you a lot of heartache.

johnllew

schiff wrote:

If the Inspector's claim that you have had 7 years of high-level income is to stand up, he would expect you to have assets to show this - a good level of savings, a posh house, posh car, second home abroad somewhere, expensive jewellery, etc.

The clever evader doesn't leave any evidence - he spends it all on having a good time, not on traceable assets.