FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Doug Barrowman and 7000 to 8000 contractors avoiding tax
Doug Barrowman and 7000 to 8000 contractors avoiding tax
Jump to: Newest in thread
It looks like there were at least 7000 to 8000 teachers , agency nurses, IT contractors and other other self employed professionals prepared to avoid or not pay the full amount of tax due on their earbings . These so called professionals were happy to use Doug Barrowman , the husband of Michelle Mone in order to reduce their tax liability by dubious means .
The good news is that HMRC caught up with them and they are bring pursued for the full amounts due. At least justice is now being served . |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
 |
By (user no longer on site) 43 weeks ago
|
"It looks like there were at least 7000 to 8000 teachers , agency nurses, IT contractors and other other self employed professionals prepared to avoid or not pay the full amount of tax due on their earbings . These so called professionals were happy to use Doug Barrowman , the husband of Michelle Mone in order to reduce their tax liability by dubious means .
The good news is that HMRC caught up with them and they are bring pursued for the full amounts due. At least justice is now being served . "
Earbings?  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It looks like there were at least 7000 to 8000 teachers , agency nurses, IT contractors and other other self employed professionals prepared to avoid or not pay the full amount of tax due on their earbings . These so called professionals were happy to use Doug Barrowman , the husband of Michelle Mone in order to reduce their tax liability by dubious means .
The good news is that HMRC caught up with them and they are bring pursued for the full amounts due. At least justice is now being served .
Earbings? "
Apologies. Earnings |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 43 weeks ago
|
"It looks like there were at least 7000 to 8000 teachers , agency nurses, IT contractors and other other self employed professionals prepared to avoid or not pay the full amount of tax due on their earbings . These so called professionals were happy to use Doug Barrowman , the husband of Michelle Mone in order to reduce their tax liability by dubious means .
The good news is that HMRC caught up with them and they are bring pursued for the full amounts due. At least justice is now being served .
Earbings? Apologies. Earnings "
Barrowman and Mone are crooks, I hope they get sent to jail |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It looks like there were at least 7000 to 8000 teachers , agency nurses, IT contractors and other other self employed professionals prepared to avoid or not pay the full amount of tax due on their earnings . These so called professionals were happy to use Doug Barrowman , the husband of Michelle Mone in order to reduce their tax liability by dubious means"
That's a bit like saying everyone who uses an accountant is a tax-avoider. Judgy much ?
.
You do realise there are many legitimate and also not so legitimate Umbrella Schemes for self-employed people out there ? A great many of these folk would have just wanted a simple umbrella scheme to handle their tax for them because they were self-employed.
The problem is, joe public has no way of knowing which are genuine schemes and which are not.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It looks like there were at least 7000 to 8000 teachers , agency nurses, IT contractors and other other self employed professionals prepared to avoid or not pay the full amount of tax due on their earnings . These so called professionals were happy to use Doug Barrowman , the husband of Michelle Mone in order to reduce their tax liability by dubious means
That's a bit like saying everyone who uses an accountant is a tax-avoider. Judgy much ?
.
You do realise there are many legitimate and also not so legitimate Umbrella Schemes for self-employed people out there ? A great many of these folk would have just wanted a simple umbrella scheme to handle their tax for them because they were self-employed.
The problem is, joe public has no way of knowing which are genuine schemes and which are not.
"
. I would have thought that in view of the substantial savings involved most rational people would be highly sceptical . The schemes were vastly different to those for people who were either inside or outside IR35.
In any event a phone call to HMRC would have clarified. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 43 weeks ago
|
"It looks like there were at least 7000 to 8000 teachers , agency nurses, IT contractors and other other self employed professionals prepared to avoid or not pay the full amount of tax due on their earnings . These so called professionals were happy to use Doug Barrowman , the husband of Michelle Mone in order to reduce their tax liability by dubious means
That's a bit like saying everyone who uses an accountant is a tax-avoider. Judgy much ?
.
You do realise there are many legitimate and also not so legitimate Umbrella Schemes for self-employed people out there ? A great many of these folk would have just wanted a simple umbrella scheme to handle their tax for them because they were self-employed.
The problem is, joe public has no way of knowing which are genuine schemes and which are not.
"
these schemes were always grey. However it read like Barrowman (or companies linked to him) continued to push after laws were changed, combined with these companies making fraudulent statements.
From what I read, the schemes always looked like a dodge that played the spaces.
If your accountant ever says we aren't going to get you paid, instead a second company will loan you money you never have to pay back, then that should raise eyebrows imo. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Add Brendon Carroll’s cast who’s earnings are sent to a shell company registered in Mauritius
“I was told the money went to a trust and it wasn’t mine until I received it, and I didn’t have to pay any tax until I got the money,”
https://amp.theguardian.com/news/2017/nov/06/mrs-browns-boys-stars-used-web-of-offshore-companies-to-avoid-tax |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 43 weeks ago
|
"It looks like there were at least 7000 to 8000 teachers , agency nurses, IT contractors and other other self employed professionals prepared to avoid or not pay the full amount of tax due on their earnings . These so called professionals were happy to use Doug Barrowman , the husband of Michelle Mone in order to reduce their tax liability by dubious means
That's a bit like saying everyone who uses an accountant is a tax-avoider. Judgy much ?
.
You do realise there are many legitimate and also not so legitimate Umbrella Schemes for self-employed people out there ? A great many of these folk would have just wanted a simple umbrella scheme to handle their tax for them because they were self-employed.
The problem is, joe public has no way of knowing which are genuine schemes and which are not.
. I would have thought that in view of the substantial savings involved most rational people would be highly sceptical . The schemes were vastly different to those for people who were either inside or outside IR35.
In any event a phone call to HMRC would have clarified."
Some of the people caught out by Barrowmen are truck drivers, land lords , pony and horse owners and tories, whatever does this mean ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple 42 weeks ago
Brighton |
While the NCA have to compile evidence for their case, even a blind man can see what happened with PPE Medpro.
They wanted to keep Barrowman’s involvement quiet due to his troubles with HMRC (AML and The Knox Group). So the fact he was the Person with Significant Control was hidden/not declared when the company was registered five days before Mone made her approach to the VIP lane via Gove. Shady as shit. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"While the NCA have to compile evidence for their case, even a blind man can see what happened with PPE Medpro.
They wanted to keep Barrowman’s involvement quiet due to his troubles with HMRC (AML and The Knox Group). So the fact he was the Person with Significant Control was hidden/not declared when the company was registered five days before Mone made her approach to the VIP lane via Gove. Shady as shit. "
. However at the time the government was in desperation need of PPE and Michelle Mone was in a position to supply it. Saving lives was a priority . If everything was so obvious as people are claiming why did Civil Servants not flag it at the time?
Michelle Mone has already offered a settlement but it was declined . Maybe some lawyers just want to line their own pockets and drag the case out .
I prefer to assume that people and not guilty unto a case is proved in court.
As things stand it looks like various public bodies are crawling all over the affairs of Michelle Mone and Douglas Barrowman .
No doubt should they have done anything wrong with the number of people crawling all over their affairs they will face charges.
It would seem that some people would like to convict them regardless of evidence
At least 7500 tax payers attempted to use a scheme promoted by Doug Barrowman to reduce their tax liability . The good news is that HMRC ruled to scheme to be invalid for the purposes of saving tax and anyone involved in these schemes will now have to pay the correct amount of tax due .
Great news for honest law abiding tax payers. Maybe we should name and shame the 7500 people who attempted to avoid paying tax .. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple 42 weeks ago
Brighton |
"While the NCA have to compile evidence for their case, even a blind man can see what happened with PPE Medpro.
They wanted to keep Barrowman’s involvement quiet due to his troubles with HMRC (AML and The Knox Group). So the fact he was the Person with Significant Control was hidden/not declared when the company was registered five days before Mone made her approach to the VIP lane via Gove. Shady as shit. . However at the time the government was in desperation need of PPE and Michelle Mone was in a position to supply it. Saving lives was a priority . If everything was so obvious as people are claiming why did Civil Servants not flag it at the time?
Michelle Mone has already offered a settlement but it was declined . Maybe some lawyers just want to line their own pockets and drag the case out .
I prefer to assume that people and not guilty unto a case is proved in court.
As things stand it looks like various public bodies are crawling all over the affairs of Michelle Mone and Douglas Barrowman .
No doubt should they have done anything wrong with the number of people crawling all over their affairs they will face charges.
It would seem that some people would like to convict them regardless of evidence
At least 7500 tax payers attempted to use a scheme promoted by Doug Barrowman to reduce their tax liability . The good news is that HMRC ruled to scheme to be invalid for the purposes of saving tax and anyone involved in these schemes will now have to pay the correct amount of tax due .
Great news for honest law abiding tax payers. Maybe we should name and shame the 7500 people who attempted to avoid paying tax .."
Oh dear oh dear Pat mi ol’ mate!
The NCA don’t investigate people for no reason. You know that right? This isn’t about the PPE itself. Keep watching.
I’m not even going to get into all that was wrong with the VIP Lane or the point that if Mone/Barrowman were, as you imply, simply stepping in to help the country in its’ hour of need, then why taking a 30% pure profit is obscene. It is all rather tiresome to keep repeating and you can read the other threads on this.
As for the 7500 tax avoiders. Be aware that there have been several suicides as a result of the way HMRC chose to investigate and aggressively pursue them over the “Loan Charge”. All the while Barrowman was getting off scott free. His companies persuaded freelancers that his scheme(s) were perfectly legal. Now I think if it seems too good to be true then it is, but Barrowman and colleagues should be held to account as much as the freelance contractors, and Barrowman made significantly more money from it then the contractors did. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It looks like there were at least 7000 to 8000 teachers , agency nurses, IT contractors and other other self employed professionals prepared to avoid or not pay the full amount of tax due on their earbings . These so called professionals were happy to use Doug Barrowman , the husband of Michelle Mone in order to reduce their tax liability by dubious means .
The good news is that HMRC caught up with them and they are bring pursued for the full amounts due. At least justice is now being served .
Earbings? Apologies. Earnings "
I actually liked Earbings.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I’ve been a contractor and one of the ruses used by the less scrupulous agencies and umbrellas was to seel their contact databases to the type of outfits that operated these “director loan: schemes. I would get calls every week offering to let me keep 98% of my day rate if I signed up and paid a small fee. Common sense says that if it seems too good to be true, it probably is.
The big dog-whistle has always been when the paper publicise the head;line day rate “NHS finance irector on £750 a day” - seems extortionate, but when you factor in the on-costs (employers NI, pension contributions, insurances and other costs of employing someone) that pans out at a salary of about £110k a year, hardlly enough to get rich on and not much compensation to someone responsible for multiple corproate service functions and runnign a multi-£m budget for a Trust. All that happens on £750 a day is you transfer the costs and admin of employment over to the contractor who then has responsibility for paying their own taxes.
The other dog-whistle is contractors are greedy. Most I knew were just trying to make a living being paid often times less favourably than their perm counterparts and having to subsidise gaps in their work. The fact is, our tax burden is way, way too high to be sustainable. As a higher rate tax payer (and this calculation takes into account income tax, NI, council tax, VAT on my disposable income, smaller taxes like car tax, tax on car insurance, fuel duty etc) I return about 58p in every £1 I spend to HMRC. most of it is “hidden” (like VAT, you never think that 20p in every £1 of what you buy is tax) or taken at source and that is far too much. It’s no spurprise some people use tax avoidance schemes (which are illegal) as well as tax minimisation (which are not, and I would suggest the obligation of every tax payer to utilise). |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 42 weeks ago
|
"It looks like there were at least 7000 to 8000 teachers , agency nurses, IT contractors and other other self employed professionals prepared to avoid or not pay the full amount of tax due on their earbings . These so called professionals were happy to use Doug Barrowman , the husband of Michelle Mone in order to reduce their tax liability by dubious means .
The good news is that HMRC caught up with them and they are bring pursued for the full amounts due. At least justice is now being served . "
He’s a horrific creature. Got to ask why the government paid someone in an offshore account in the first place. Surely we can set payment terms? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple 42 weeks ago
Brighton |
"It looks like there were at least 7000 to 8000 teachers , agency nurses, IT contractors and other other self employed professionals prepared to avoid or not pay the full amount of tax due on their earbings . These so called professionals were happy to use Doug Barrowman , the husband of Michelle Mone in order to reduce their tax liability by dubious means .
The good news is that HMRC caught up with them and they are bring pursued for the full amounts due. At least justice is now being served .
He’s a horrific creature. Got to ask why the government paid someone in an offshore account in the first place. Surely we can set payment terms?"
As I understand it:
1. Barrowman set up PPE Medpro UK registering in Companies House 5 days before Mone approached Gove/VIP Lane.
2. There was no declaration that Barrowman was a Person with Significant Control or that the actual ownership of Medpro UK was either Barrowman or an Isle of Man registered company. Instead the Director and only shareholder declared was a long term business associate of Barrowman (a kind of “rent a Director” type). He was later replaced by another long term associate and all shares transferred (this chap being one involved in the dodgy loan charge firms and under investigation by HMRC).
3. After Medpro was awarded the £200m+ contract Barrowman was involved in negotiations with suppliers abroad.
4. Barrowman then personally received a payment of c.£60m from Medpro into a bank account on Isle of Man (I am not sure if that was a personal account or business account). No tax was paid on this as offshore.
5. Barrowman then paid £29m into an offshore Trust Fund that benefits Mone and her children (and possibly his children from earlier marriage). No tax was paid on this as offshore (UK Trust Funds can only receive £650k per year tax free).
So the question is why would both Barrowman and Mone hide their involvement in Medpro? They claim privacy! I say concern over the HMRC investigation into other business ventures and worry that would halt any contract being awarded! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 42 weeks ago
|
"It looks like there were at least 7000 to 8000 teachers , agency nurses, IT contractors and other other self employed professionals prepared to avoid or not pay the full amount of tax due on their earbings . These so called professionals were happy to use Doug Barrowman , the husband of Michelle Mone in order to reduce their tax liability by dubious means .
The good news is that HMRC caught up with them and they are bring pursued for the full amounts due. At least justice is now being served .
He’s a horrific creature. Got to ask why the government paid someone in an offshore account in the first place. Surely we can set payment terms?
As I understand it:
1. Barrowman set up PPE Medpro UK registering in Companies House 5 days before Mone approached Gove/VIP Lane.
2. There was no declaration that Barrowman was a Person with Significant Control or that the actual ownership of Medpro UK was either Barrowman or an Isle of Man registered company. Instead the Director and only shareholder declared was a long term business associate of Barrowman (a kind of “rent a Director” type). He was later replaced by another long term associate and all shares transferred (this chap being one involved in the dodgy loan charge firms and under investigation by HMRC).
3. After Medpro was awarded the £200m+ contract Barrowman was involved in negotiations with suppliers abroad.
4. Barrowman then personally received a payment of c.£60m from Medpro into a bank account on Isle of Man (I am not sure if that was a personal account or business account). No tax was paid on this as offshore.
5. Barrowman then paid £29m into an offshore Trust Fund that benefits Mone and her children (and possibly his children from earlier marriage). No tax was paid on this as offshore (UK Trust Funds can only receive £650k per year tax free).
So the question is why would both Barrowman and Mone hide their involvement in Medpro? They claim privacy! I say concern over the HMRC investigation into other business ventures and worry that would halt any contract being awarded! "
Back to your favourite topic.
Sad. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple 42 weeks ago
Brighton |
"It looks like there were at least 7000 to 8000 teachers , agency nurses, IT contractors and other other self employed professionals prepared to avoid or not pay the full amount of tax due on their earbings . These so called professionals were happy to use Doug Barrowman , the husband of Michelle Mone in order to reduce their tax liability by dubious means .
The good news is that HMRC caught up with them and they are bring pursued for the full amounts due. At least justice is now being served .
He’s a horrific creature. Got to ask why the government paid someone in an offshore account in the first place. Surely we can set payment terms?
As I understand it:
1. Barrowman set up PPE Medpro UK registering in Companies House 5 days before Mone approached Gove/VIP Lane.
2. There was no declaration that Barrowman was a Person with Significant Control or that the actual ownership of Medpro UK was either Barrowman or an Isle of Man registered company. Instead the Director and only shareholder declared was a long term business associate of Barrowman (a kind of “rent a Director” type). He was later replaced by another long term associate and all shares transferred (this chap being one involved in the dodgy loan charge firms and under investigation by HMRC).
3. After Medpro was awarded the £200m+ contract Barrowman was involved in negotiations with suppliers abroad.
4. Barrowman then personally received a payment of c.£60m from Medpro into a bank account on Isle of Man (I am not sure if that was a personal account or business account). No tax was paid on this as offshore.
5. Barrowman then paid £29m into an offshore Trust Fund that benefits Mone and her children (and possibly his children from earlier marriage). No tax was paid on this as offshore (UK Trust Funds can only receive £650k per year tax free).
So the question is why would both Barrowman and Mone hide their involvement in Medpro? They claim privacy! I say concern over the HMRC investigation into other business ventures and worry that would halt any contract being awarded!
Back to your favourite topic.
Sad."
And yet you felt compelled to comment so... “sad back at ya...na na na!”  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"While the NCA have to compile evidence for their case, even a blind man can see what happened with PPE Medpro.
They wanted to keep Barrowman’s involvement quiet due to his troubles with HMRC (AML and The Knox Group). So the fact he was the Person with Significant Control was hidden/not declared when the company was registered five days before Mone made her approach to the VIP lane via Gove. Shady as shit. . However at the time the government was in desperation need of PPE and Michelle Mone was in a position to supply it. Saving lives was a priority . If everything was so obvious as people are claiming why did Civil Servants not flag it at the time?
Michelle Mone has already offered a settlement but it was declined . Maybe some lawyers just want to line their own pockets and drag the case out .
I prefer to assume that people are not guilty unto a case is proved in court.
As things stand it looks like various public bodies are crawling all over the affairs of Michelle Mone and Douglas Barrowman .
No doubt should they have done anything wrong with the number of people crawling all over their affairs they will face charges.
It would seem that some people would like to convict them regardless of evidence
At least 7500 tax payers attempted to use a scheme promoted by Doug Barrowman to reduce their tax liability . The good news is that HMRC ruled to scheme to be invalid for the purposes of saving tax and anyone involved in these schemes will now have to pay the correct amount of tax due .
Great news for honest law abiding tax payers. Maybe we should name and shame the 7500 people who attempted to avoid paying tax ..
Oh dear oh dear Pat mi ol’ mate!
The NCA don’t investigate people for no reason. You know that right? This isn’t about the PPE itself. Keep watching.
I’m not even going to get into all that was wrong with the VIP Lane or the point that if Mone/Barrowman were, as you imply, simply stepping in to help the country in its’ hour of need, then why taking a 30% pure profit is obscene. It is all rather tiresome to keep repeating and you can read the other threads on this.
As for the 7500 tax avoiders. Be aware that there have been several suicides as a result of the way HMRC chose to investigate and aggressively pursue them over the “Loan Charge”. All the while Barrowman was getting off scott free. His companies persuaded freelancers that his scheme(s) were perfectly legal. Now I think if it seems too good to be true then it is, but Barrowman and colleagues should be held to account as much as the freelance contractors, and Barrowman made significantly more money from it then the contractors did."
. I would prefer to evaluate the evidence before assuming anyone is guilty . Once all the evidence is presented to a court a decision can then be made ( though courts and juries do not always get the decisions correct , we have more than a few miscarriages of justice .
Correct decisions can always be made with the benefit of hindsight. As things stand Michelle Mone had access to PPE during a time of world wide shortages and could probably have sold it to numerous other parties throughout the world. Maybe those so keen to criticise Michelle Mone should advise us how many people they would allow to die whilst more competitive terms were negotiated. There was hardly a surplus of PPE.
The government always made it clear that the schemes would be audited after the event and this is exactly what has happened. Any company taking advantage of the scheme would be pursued
Once all the facts are made public the general population will be in a better position to judge if Michellle Mone did anything wrong . She has already attempted to settle the matter. I always assume that people are innocent unto proved guilty.
What we do know is that at least 7500 tax payers attempted to take advantage of schemes promoted by Douglas Barrowman . At least the governmen have recovered to amounts avoided from the tax payers concerned . With regard to the ones who you claim to have committed suicide as a result of these investigations why did other family members not help them out . Had they no savings or house to sell ? People involved in these schemes have no sympathy from me.
I drive a secondhand car which is eleven years old and 127000 on the clock. Millions of hard working UK citizens are in the same position as me . I am in regular contact with care workers and lower paid members of the population.
As we all pay our taxes on a paye basis no one should express any sympathy towards those who choose not to . Clearly 7500 people thought otherwise |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 42 weeks ago
|
"While the NCA have to compile evidence for their case, even a blind man can see what happened with PPE Medpro.
They wanted to keep Barrowman’s involvement quiet due to his troubles with HMRC (AML and The Knox Group). So the fact he was the Person with Significant Control was hidden/not declared when the company was registered five days before Mone made her approach to the VIP lane via Gove. Shady as shit. . However at the time the government was in desperation need of PPE and Michelle Mone was in a position to supply it. Saving lives was a priority . If everything was so obvious as people are claiming why did Civil Servants not flag it at the time?
Michelle Mone has already offered a settlement but it was declined . Maybe some lawyers just want to line their own pockets and drag the case out .
I prefer to assume that people are not guilty unto a case is proved in court.
As things stand it looks like various public bodies are crawling all over the affairs of Michelle Mone and Douglas Barrowman .
No doubt should they have done anything wrong with the number of people crawling all over their affairs they will face charges.
It would seem that some people would like to convict them regardless of evidence
At least 7500 tax payers attempted to use a scheme promoted by Doug Barrowman to reduce their tax liability . The good news is that HMRC ruled to scheme to be invalid for the purposes of saving tax and anyone involved in these schemes will now have to pay the correct amount of tax due .
Great news for honest law abiding tax payers. Maybe we should name and shame the 7500 people who attempted to avoid paying tax ..
Oh dear oh dear Pat mi ol’ mate!
The NCA don’t investigate people for no reason. You know that right? This isn’t about the PPE itself. Keep watching.
I’m not even going to get into all that was wrong with the VIP Lane or the point that if Mone/Barrowman were, as you imply, simply stepping in to help the country in its’ hour of need, then why taking a 30% pure profit is obscene. It is all rather tiresome to keep repeating and you can read the other threads on this.
As for the 7500 tax avoiders. Be aware that there have been several suicides as a result of the way HMRC chose to investigate and aggressively pursue them over the “Loan Charge”. All the while Barrowman was getting off scott free. His companies persuaded freelancers that his scheme(s) were perfectly legal. Now I think if it seems too good to be true then it is, but Barrowman and colleagues should be held to account as much as the freelance contractors, and Barrowman made significantly more money from it then the contractors did. . I would prefer to evaluate the evidence before assuming anyone is guilty . Once all the evidence is presented to a court a decision can then be made ( though courts and juries do not always get the decisions correct , we have more than a few miscarriages of justice .
Correct decisions can always be made with the benefit of hindsight. As things stand Michelle Mone had access to PPE during a time of world wide shortages and could probably have sold it to numerous other parties throughout the world. Maybe those so keen to criticise Michelle Mone should advise us how many people they would allow to die whilst more competitive terms were negotiated. There was hardly a surplus of PPE.
The government always made it clear that the schemes would be audited after the event and this is exactly what has happened. Any company taking advantage of the scheme would be pursued
Once all the facts are made public the general population will be in a better position to judge if Michellle Mone did anything wrong . She has already attempted to settle the matter. I always assume that people are innocent unto proved guilty.
What we do know is that at least 7500 tax payers attempted to take advantage of schemes promoted by Douglas Barrowman . At least the governmen have recovered to amounts avoided from the tax payers concerned . With regard to the ones who you claim to have committed suicide as a result of these investigations why did other family members not help them out . Had they no savings or house to sell ? People involved in these schemes have no sympathy from me.
I drive a secondhand car which is eleven years old and 127000 on the clock. Millions of hard working UK citizens are in the same position as me . I am in regular contact with care workers and lower paid members of the population.
As we all pay our taxes on a paye basis no one should express any sympathy towards those who choose not to . Clearly 7500 people thought otherwise "
You ‘assume’ that Mone is not guilty yet you ‘assume’ 7,500 people tried to avoid paying taxes? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"While the NCA have to compile evidence for their case, even a blind man can see what happened with PPE Medpro.
They wanted to keep Barrowman’s involvement quiet due to his troubles with HMRC (AML and The Knox Group). So the fact he was the Person with Significant Control was hidden/not declared when the company was registered five days before Mone made her approach to the VIP lane via Gove. Shady as shit. . However at the time the government was in desperation need of PPE and Michelle Mone was in a position to supply it. Saving lives was a priority . If everything was so obvious as people are claiming why did Civil Servants not flag it at the time?
Michelle Mone has already offered a settlement but it was declined . Maybe some lawyers just want to line their own pockets and drag the case out .
I prefer to assume that people are not guilty unto a case is proved in court.
As things stand it looks like various public bodies are crawling all over the affairs of Michelle Mone and Douglas Barrowman .
No doubt should they have done anything wrong with the number of people crawling all over their affairs they will face charges.
It would seem that some people would like to convict them regardless of evidence
At least 7500 tax payers attempted to use a scheme promoted by Doug Barrowman to reduce their tax liability . The good news is that HMRC ruled to scheme to be invalid for the purposes of saving tax and anyone involved in these schemes will now have to pay the correct amount of tax due .
Great news for honest law abiding tax payers. Maybe we should name and shame the 7500 people who attempted to avoid paying tax ..
Oh dear oh dear Pat mi ol’ mate!
The NCA don’t investigate people for no reason. You know that right? This isn’t about the PPE itself. Keep watching.
I’m not even going to get into all that was wrong with the VIP Lane or the point that if Mone/Barrowman were, as you imply, simply stepping in to help the country in its’ hour of need, then why taking a 30% pure profit is obscene. It is all rather tiresome to keep repeating and you can read the other threads on this.
As for the 7500 tax avoiders. Be aware that there have been several suicides as a result of the way HMRC chose to investigate and aggressively pursue them over the “Loan Charge”. All the while Barrowman was getting off scott free. His companies persuaded freelancers that his scheme(s) were perfectly legal. Now I think if it seems too good to be true then it is, but Barrowman and colleagues should be held to account as much as the freelance contractors, and Barrowman made significantly more money from it then the contractors did. . I would prefer to evaluate the evidence before assuming anyone is guilty . Once all the evidence is presented to a court a decision can then be made ( though courts and juries do not always get the decisions correct , we have more than a few miscarriages of justice .
Correct decisions can always be made with the benefit of hindsight. As things stand Michelle Mone had access to PPE during a time of world wide shortages and could probably have sold it to numerous other parties throughout the world. Maybe those so keen to criticise Michelle Mone should advise us how many people they would allow to die whilst more competitive terms were negotiated. There was hardly a surplus of PPE.
The government always made it clear that the schemes would be audited after the event and this is exactly what has happened. Any company taking advantage of the scheme would be pursued
Once all the facts are made public the general population will be in a better position to judge if Michellle Mone did anything wrong . She has already attempted to settle the matter. I always assume that people are innocent unto proved guilty.
What we do know is that at least 7500 tax payers attempted to take advantage of schemes promoted by Douglas Barrowman . At least the governmen have recovered to amounts avoided from the tax payers concerned . With regard to the ones who you claim to have committed suicide as a result of these investigations why did other family members not help them out . Had they no savings or house to sell ? People involved in these schemes have no sympathy from me.
I drive a secondhand car which is eleven years old and 127000 on the clock. Millions of hard working UK citizens are in the same position as me . I am in regular contact with care workers and lower paid members of the population.
As we all pay our taxes on a paye basis no one should express any sympathy towards those who choose not to . Clearly 7500 people thought otherwise
You ‘assume’ that Mone is not guilty yet you ‘assume’ 7,500 people tried to avoid paying taxes? "
The world according to pat is a truly skewed one.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 42 weeks ago
|
"While the NCA have to compile evidence for their case, even a blind man can see what happened with PPE Medpro.
They wanted to keep Barrowman’s involvement quiet due to his troubles with HMRC (AML and The Knox Group). So the fact he was the Person with Significant Control was hidden/not declared when the company was registered five days before Mone made her approach to the VIP lane via Gove. Shady as shit. . However at the time the government was in desperation need of PPE and Michelle Mone was in a position to supply it. Saving lives was a priority . If everything was so obvious as people are claiming why did Civil Servants not flag it at the time?
Michelle Mone has already offered a settlement but it was declined . Maybe some lawyers just want to line their own pockets and drag the case out .
I prefer to assume that people are not guilty unto a case is proved in court.
As things stand it looks like various public bodies are crawling all over the affairs of Michelle Mone and Douglas Barrowman .
No doubt should they have done anything wrong with the number of people crawling all over their affairs they will face charges.
It would seem that some people would like to convict them regardless of evidence
At least 7500 tax payers attempted to use a scheme promoted by Doug Barrowman to reduce their tax liability . The good news is that HMRC ruled to scheme to be invalid for the purposes of saving tax and anyone involved in these schemes will now have to pay the correct amount of tax due .
Great news for honest law abiding tax payers. Maybe we should name and shame the 7500 people who attempted to avoid paying tax ..
Oh dear oh dear Pat mi ol’ mate!
The NCA don’t investigate people for no reason. You know that right? This isn’t about the PPE itself. Keep watching.
I’m not even going to get into all that was wrong with the VIP Lane or the point that if Mone/Barrowman were, as you imply, simply stepping in to help the country in its’ hour of need, then why taking a 30% pure profit is obscene. It is all rather tiresome to keep repeating and you can read the other threads on this.
As for the 7500 tax avoiders. Be aware that there have been several suicides as a result of the way HMRC chose to investigate and aggressively pursue them over the “Loan Charge”. All the while Barrowman was getting off scott free. His companies persuaded freelancers that his scheme(s) were perfectly legal. Now I think if it seems too good to be true then it is, but Barrowman and colleagues should be held to account as much as the freelance contractors, and Barrowman made significantly more money from it then the contractors did. . I would prefer to evaluate the evidence before assuming anyone is guilty . Once all the evidence is presented to a court a decision can then be made ( though courts and juries do not always get the decisions correct , we have more than a few miscarriages of justice .
Correct decisions can always be made with the benefit of hindsight. As things stand Michelle Mone had access to PPE during a time of world wide shortages and could probably have sold it to numerous other parties throughout the world. Maybe those so keen to criticise Michelle Mone should advise us how many people they would allow to die whilst more competitive terms were negotiated. There was hardly a surplus of PPE.
The government always made it clear that the schemes would be audited after the event and this is exactly what has happened. Any company taking advantage of the scheme would be pursued
Once all the facts are made public the general population will be in a better position to judge if Michellle Mone did anything wrong . She has already attempted to settle the matter. I always assume that people are innocent unto proved guilty.
What we do know is that at least 7500 tax payers attempted to take advantage of schemes promoted by Douglas Barrowman . At least the governmen have recovered to amounts avoided from the tax payers concerned . With regard to the ones who you claim to have committed suicide as a result of these investigations why did other family members not help them out . Had they no savings or house to sell ? People involved in these schemes have no sympathy from me.
I drive a secondhand car which is eleven years old and 127000 on the clock. Millions of hard working UK citizens are in the same position as me . I am in regular contact with care workers and lower paid members of the population.
As we all pay our taxes on a paye basis no one should express any sympathy towards those who choose not to . Clearly 7500 people thought otherwise
You ‘assume’ that Mone is not guilty yet you ‘assume’ 7,500 people tried to avoid paying taxes?
The world according to pat is a truly skewed one.."
Just a die hard Tory being a Tory |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"While the NCA have to compile evidence for their case, even a blind man can see what happened with PPE Medpro.
They wanted to keep Barrowman’s involvement quiet due to his troubles with HMRC (AML and The Knox Group). So the fact he was the Person with Significant Control was hidden/not declared when the company was registered five days before Mone made her approach to the VIP lane via Gove. Shady as shit. . However at the time the government was in desperation need of PPE and Michelle Mone was in a position to supply it. Saving lives was a priority . If everything was so obvious as people are claiming why did Civil Servants not flag it at the time?
Michelle Mone has already offered a settlement but it was declined . Maybe some lawyers just want to line their own pockets and drag the case out .
I prefer to assume that people are not guilty unto a case is proved in court.
As things stand it looks like various public bodies are crawling all over the affairs of Michelle Mone and Douglas Barrowman .
No doubt should they have done anything wrong with the number of people crawling all over their affairs they will face charges.
It would seem that some people would like to convict them regardless of evidence
At least 7500 tax payers attempted to use a scheme promoted by Doug Barrowman to reduce their tax liability . The good news is that HMRC ruled to scheme to be invalid for the purposes of saving tax and anyone involved in these schemes will now have to pay the correct amount of tax due .
Great news for honest law abiding tax payers. Maybe we should name and shame the 7500 people who attempted to avoid paying tax ..
Oh dear oh dear Pat mi ol’ mate!
The NCA don’t investigate people for no reason. You know that right? This isn’t about the PPE itself. Keep watching.
I’m not even going to get into all that was wrong with the VIP Lane or the point that if Mone/Barrowman were, as you imply, simply stepping in to help the country in its’ hour of need, then why taking a 30% pure profit is obscene. It is all rather tiresome to keep repeating and you can read the other threads on this.
As for the 7500 tax avoiders. Be aware that there have been several suicides as a result of the way HMRC chose to investigate and aggressively pursue them over the “Loan Charge”. All the while Barrowman was getting off scott free. His companies persuaded freelancers that his scheme(s) were perfectly legal. Now I think if it seems too good to be true then it is, but Barrowman and colleagues should be held to account as much as the freelance contractors, and Barrowman made significantly more money from it then the contractors did. . I would prefer to evaluate the evidence before assuming anyone is guilty . Once all the evidence is presented to a court a decision can then be made ( though courts and juries do not always get the decisions correct , we have more than a few miscarriages of justice .
Correct decisions can always be made with the benefit of hindsight. As things stand Michelle Mone had access to PPE during a time of world wide shortages and could probably have sold it to numerous other parties throughout the world. Maybe those so keen to criticise Michelle Mone should advise us how many people they would allow to die whilst more competitive terms were negotiated. There was hardly a surplus of PPE.
The government always made it clear that the schemes would be audited after the event and this is exactly what has happened. Any company taking advantage of the scheme would be pursued
Once all the facts are made public the general population will be in a better position to judge if Michellle Mone did anything wrong . She has already attempted to settle the matter. I always assume that people are innocent unto proved guilty.
What we do know is that at least 7500 tax payers attempted to take advantage of schemes promoted by Douglas Barrowman . At least the governmen have recovered to amounts avoided from the tax payers concerned . With regard to the ones who you claim to have committed suicide as a result of these investigations why did other family members not help them out . Had they no savings or house to sell ? People involved in these schemes have no sympathy from me.
I drive a secondhand car which is eleven years old and 127000 on the clock. Millions of hard working UK citizens are in the same position as me . I am in regular contact with care workers and lower paid members of the population.
As we all pay our taxes on a paye basis no one should express any sympathy towards those who choose not to . Clearly 7500 people thought otherwise
You ‘assume’ that Mone is not guilty yet you ‘assume’ 7,500 people tried to avoid paying taxes? "
. I never said she was not guilty. However like most people I would prefer to see the evidence before passing judgement or making an assessment .
Just using basic common sense the 7500 tax payers to whom I refer must have known that what they were doing was morally wrong and unacceptable . A quick phone call to HMRC would have clarified the |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 42 weeks ago
|
"It looks like there were at least 7000 to 8000 teachers , agency nurses, IT contractors and other other self employed professionals prepared to avoid or not pay the full amount of tax due on their earbings . These so called professionals were happy to use Doug Barrowman , the husband of Michelle Mone in order to reduce their tax liability by dubious means .
The good news is that HMRC caught up with them and they are bring pursued for the full amounts due. At least justice is now being served .
He’s a horrific creature. Got to ask why the government paid someone in an offshore account in the first place. Surely we can set payment terms?
As I understand it:
1. Barrowman set up PPE Medpro UK registering in Companies House 5 days before Mone approached Gove/VIP Lane.
2. There was no declaration that Barrowman was a Person with Significant Control or that the actual ownership of Medpro UK was either Barrowman or an Isle of Man registered company. Instead the Director and only shareholder declared was a long term business associate of Barrowman (a kind of “rent a Director” type). He was later replaced by another long term associate and all shares transferred (this chap being one involved in the dodgy loan charge firms and under investigation by HMRC).
3. After Medpro was awarded the £200m+ contract Barrowman was involved in negotiations with suppliers abroad.
4. Barrowman then personally received a payment of c.£60m from Medpro into a bank account on Isle of Man (I am not sure if that was a personal account or business account). No tax was paid on this as offshore.
5. Barrowman then paid £29m into an offshore Trust Fund that benefits Mone and her children (and possibly his children from earlier marriage). No tax was paid on this as offshore (UK Trust Funds can only receive £650k per year tax free).
So the question is why would both Barrowman and Mone hide their involvement in Medpro? They claim privacy! I say concern over the HMRC investigation into other business ventures and worry that would halt any contract being awarded! "
I think of the requirements any business goes through to become a supplier to UK government departments and the criteria that’s set. It’s astonishing that a company set up only 5 days prior would be awarded a £200 million contract.
When I say “astonishing” I mean “outrageous/suspicious” |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"While the NCA have to compile evidence for their case, even a blind man can see what happened with PPE Medpro.
They wanted to keep Barrowman’s involvement quiet due to his troubles with HMRC (AML and The Knox Group). So the fact he was the Person with Significant Control was hidden/not declared when the company was registered five days before Mone made her approach to the VIP lane via Gove. Shady as shit. . However at the time the government was in desperation need of PPE and Michelle Mone was in a position to supply it. Saving lives was a priority . If everything was so obvious as people are claiming why did Civil Servants not flag it at the time?
Michelle Mone has already offered a settlement but it was declined . Maybe some lawyers just want to line their own pockets and drag the case out .
I prefer to assume that people are not guilty unto a case is proved in court.
As things stand it looks like various public bodies are crawling all over the affairs of Michelle Mone and Douglas Barrowman .
No doubt should they have done anything wrong with the number of people crawling all over their affairs they will face charges.
It would seem that some people would like to convict them regardless of evidence
At least 7500 tax payers attempted to use a scheme promoted by Doug Barrowman to reduce their tax liability . The good news is that HMRC ruled to scheme to be invalid for the purposes of saving tax and anyone involved in these schemes will now have to pay the correct amount of tax due .
Great news for honest law abiding tax payers. Maybe we should name and shame the 7500 people who attempted to avoid paying tax ..
Oh dear oh dear Pat mi ol’ mate!
The NCA don’t investigate people for no reason. You know that right? This isn’t about the PPE itself. Keep watching.
I’m not even going to get into all that was wrong with the VIP Lane or the point that if Mone/Barrowman were, as you imply, simply stepping in to help the country in its’ hour of need, then why taking a 30% pure profit is obscene. It is all rather tiresome to keep repeating and you can read the other threads on this.
As for the 7500 tax avoiders. Be aware that there have been several suicides as a result of the way HMRC chose to investigate and aggressively pursue them over the “Loan Charge”. All the while Barrowman was getting off scott free. His companies persuaded freelancers that his scheme(s) were perfectly legal. Now I think if it seems too good to be true then it is, but Barrowman and colleagues should be held to account as much as the freelance contractors, and Barrowman made significantly more money from it then the contractors did. . I would prefer to evaluate the evidence before assuming anyone is guilty . Once all the evidence is presented to a court a decision can then be made ( though courts and juries do not always get the decisions correct , we have more than a few miscarriages of justice .
Correct decisions can always be made with the benefit of hindsight. As things stand Michelle Mone had access to PPE during a time of world wide shortages and could probably have sold it to numerous other parties throughout the world. Maybe those so keen to criticise Michelle Mone should advise us how many people they would allow to die whilst more competitive terms were negotiated. There was hardly a surplus of PPE.
The government always made it clear that the schemes would be audited after the event and this is exactly what has happened. Any company taking advantage of the scheme would be pursued
Once all the facts are made public the general population will be in a better position to judge if Michellle Mone did anything wrong . She has already attempted to settle the matter. I always assume that people are innocent unto proved guilty.
What we do know is that at least 7500 tax payers attempted to take advantage of schemes promoted by Douglas Barrowman . At least the governmen have recovered to amounts avoided from the tax payers concerned . With regard to the ones who you claim to have committed suicide as a result of these investigations why did other family members not help them out . Had they no savings or house to sell ? People involved in these schemes have no sympathy from me.
I drive a secondhand car which is eleven years old and 127000 on the clock. Millions of hard working UK citizens are in the same position as me . I am in regular contact with care workers and lower paid members of the population.
As we all pay our taxes on a paye basis no one should express any sympathy towards those who choose not to . Clearly 7500 people thought otherwise
You ‘assume’ that Mone is not guilty yet you ‘assume’ 7,500 people tried to avoid paying taxes?
The world according to pat is a truly skewed one.."
. Maybe most people would like to see the evidence before passing judgement. Promoting a scheme and actively participating in it are two entirely different concepts.
Surely we should be thankfully that the plans of 7500 to pay a ridiculously reduced tax rate were foiled |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 42 weeks ago
|
"While the NCA have to compile evidence for their case, even a blind man can see what happened with PPE Medpro.
They wanted to keep Barrowman’s involvement quiet due to his troubles with HMRC (AML and The Knox Group). So the fact he was the Person with Significant Control was hidden/not declared when the company was registered five days before Mone made her approach to the VIP lane via Gove. Shady as shit. . However at the time the government was in desperation need of PPE and Michelle Mone was in a position to supply it. Saving lives was a priority . If everything was so obvious as people are claiming why did Civil Servants not flag it at the time?
Michelle Mone has already offered a settlement but it was declined . Maybe some lawyers just want to line their own pockets and drag the case out .
I prefer to assume that people are not guilty unto a case is proved in court.
As things stand it looks like various public bodies are crawling all over the affairs of Michelle Mone and Douglas Barrowman .
No doubt should they have done anything wrong with the number of people crawling all over their affairs they will face charges.
It would seem that some people would like to convict them regardless of evidence
At least 7500 tax payers attempted to use a scheme promoted by Doug Barrowman to reduce their tax liability . The good news is that HMRC ruled to scheme to be invalid for the purposes of saving tax and anyone involved in these schemes will now have to pay the correct amount of tax due .
Great news for honest law abiding tax payers. Maybe we should name and shame the 7500 people who attempted to avoid paying tax ..
Oh dear oh dear Pat mi ol’ mate!
The NCA don’t investigate people for no reason. You know that right? This isn’t about the PPE itself. Keep watching.
I’m not even going to get into all that was wrong with the VIP Lane or the point that if Mone/Barrowman were, as you imply, simply stepping in to help the country in its’ hour of need, then why taking a 30% pure profit is obscene. It is all rather tiresome to keep repeating and you can read the other threads on this.
As for the 7500 tax avoiders. Be aware that there have been several suicides as a result of the way HMRC chose to investigate and aggressively pursue them over the “Loan Charge”. All the while Barrowman was getting off scott free. His companies persuaded freelancers that his scheme(s) were perfectly legal. Now I think if it seems too good to be true then it is, but Barrowman and colleagues should be held to account as much as the freelance contractors, and Barrowman made significantly more money from it then the contractors did. . I would prefer to evaluate the evidence before assuming anyone is guilty . Once all the evidence is presented to a court a decision can then be made ( though courts and juries do not always get the decisions correct , we have more than a few miscarriages of justice .
Correct decisions can always be made with the benefit of hindsight. As things stand Michelle Mone had access to PPE during a time of world wide shortages and could probably have sold it to numerous other parties throughout the world. Maybe those so keen to criticise Michelle Mone should advise us how many people they would allow to die whilst more competitive terms were negotiated. There was hardly a surplus of PPE.
The government always made it clear that the schemes would be audited after the event and this is exactly what has happened. Any company taking advantage of the scheme would be pursued
Once all the facts are made public the general population will be in a better position to judge if Michellle Mone did anything wrong . She has already attempted to settle the matter. I always assume that people are innocent unto proved guilty.
What we do know is that at least 7500 tax payers attempted to take advantage of schemes promoted by Douglas Barrowman . At least the governmen have recovered to amounts avoided from the tax payers concerned . With regard to the ones who you claim to have committed suicide as a result of these investigations why did other family members not help them out . Had they no savings or house to sell ? People involved in these schemes have no sympathy from me.
I drive a secondhand car which is eleven years old and 127000 on the clock. Millions of hard working UK citizens are in the same position as me . I am in regular contact with care workers and lower paid members of the population.
As we all pay our taxes on a paye basis no one should express any sympathy towards those who choose not to . Clearly 7500 people thought otherwise
You ‘assume’ that Mone is not guilty yet you ‘assume’ 7,500 people tried to avoid paying taxes? . I never said she was not guilty. However like most people I would prefer to see the evidence before passing judgement or making an assessment .
Just using basic common sense the 7500 tax payers to whom I refer must have known that what they were doing was morally wrong and unacceptable . A quick phone call to HMRC would have clarified the "
Why don’t you use your basic common sense regarding Barrownan and Mone and why didn’t they phone up the HMRC? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 42 weeks ago
|
"While the NCA have to compile evidence for their case, even a blind man can see what happened with PPE Medpro.
They wanted to keep Barrowman’s involvement quiet due to his troubles with HMRC (AML and The Knox Group). So the fact he was the Person with Significant Control was hidden/not declared when the company was registered five days before Mone made her approach to the VIP lane via Gove. Shady as shit. . However at the time the government was in desperation need of PPE and Michelle Mone was in a position to supply it. Saving lives was a priority . If everything was so obvious as people are claiming why did Civil Servants not flag it at the time?
Michelle Mone has already offered a settlement but it was declined . Maybe some lawyers just want to line their own pockets and drag the case out .
I prefer to assume that people are not guilty unto a case is proved in court.
As things stand it looks like various public bodies are crawling all over the affairs of Michelle Mone and Douglas Barrowman .
No doubt should they have done anything wrong with the number of people crawling all over their affairs they will face charges.
It would seem that some people would like to convict them regardless of evidence
At least 7500 tax payers attempted to use a scheme promoted by Doug Barrowman to reduce their tax liability . The good news is that HMRC ruled to scheme to be invalid for the purposes of saving tax and anyone involved in these schemes will now have to pay the correct amount of tax due .
Great news for honest law abiding tax payers. Maybe we should name and shame the 7500 people who attempted to avoid paying tax ..
Oh dear oh dear Pat mi ol’ mate!
The NCA don’t investigate people for no reason. You know that right? This isn’t about the PPE itself. Keep watching.
I’m not even going to get into all that was wrong with the VIP Lane or the point that if Mone/Barrowman were, as you imply, simply stepping in to help the country in its’ hour of need, then why taking a 30% pure profit is obscene. It is all rather tiresome to keep repeating and you can read the other threads on this.
As for the 7500 tax avoiders. Be aware that there have been several suicides as a result of the way HMRC chose to investigate and aggressively pursue them over the “Loan Charge”. All the while Barrowman was getting off scott free. His companies persuaded freelancers that his scheme(s) were perfectly legal. Now I think if it seems too good to be true then it is, but Barrowman and colleagues should be held to account as much as the freelance contractors, and Barrowman made significantly more money from it then the contractors did. . I would prefer to evaluate the evidence before assuming anyone is guilty . Once all the evidence is presented to a court a decision can then be made ( though courts and juries do not always get the decisions correct , we have more than a few miscarriages of justice .
Correct decisions can always be made with the benefit of hindsight. As things stand Michelle Mone had access to PPE during a time of world wide shortages and could probably have sold it to numerous other parties throughout the world. Maybe those so keen to criticise Michelle Mone should advise us how many people they would allow to die whilst more competitive terms were negotiated. There was hardly a surplus of PPE.
The government always made it clear that the schemes would be audited after the event and this is exactly what has happened. Any company taking advantage of the scheme would be pursued
Once all the facts are made public the general population will be in a better position to judge if Michellle Mone did anything wrong . She has already attempted to settle the matter. I always assume that people are innocent unto proved guilty.
What we do know is that at least 7500 tax payers attempted to take advantage of schemes promoted by Douglas Barrowman . At least the governmen have recovered to amounts avoided from the tax payers concerned . With regard to the ones who you claim to have committed suicide as a result of these investigations why did other family members not help them out . Had they no savings or house to sell ? People involved in these schemes have no sympathy from me.
I drive a secondhand car which is eleven years old and 127000 on the clock. Millions of hard working UK citizens are in the same position as me . I am in regular contact with care workers and lower paid members of the population.
As we all pay our taxes on a paye basis no one should express any sympathy towards those who choose not to . Clearly 7500 people thought otherwise
You ‘assume’ that Mone is not guilty yet you ‘assume’ 7,500 people tried to avoid paying taxes?
The world according to pat is a truly skewed one... Maybe most people would like to see the evidence before passing judgement. Promoting a scheme and actively participating in it are two entirely different concepts.
Surely we should be thankfully that the plans of 7500 to pay a ridiculously reduced tax rate were foiled "
Who set up the ‘ridiculous’ reduced tax rate scheme ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It looks like there were at least 7000 to 8000 teachers , agency nurses, IT contractors and other other self employed professionals prepared to avoid or not pay the full amount of tax due on their earbings . These so called professionals were happy to use Doug Barrowman , the husband of Michelle Mone in order to reduce their tax liability by dubious means .
The good news is that HMRC caught up with them and they are bring pursued for the full amounts due. At least justice is now being served .
He’s a horrific creature. Got to ask why the government paid someone in an offshore account in the first place. Surely we can set payment terms?
As I understand it:
1. Barrowman set up PPE Medpro UK registering in Companies House 5 days before Mone approached Gove/VIP Lane.
2. There was no declaration that Barrowman was a Person with Significant Control or that the actual ownership of Medpro UK was either Barrowman or an Isle of Man registered company. Instead the Director and only shareholder declared was a long term business associate of Barrowman (a kind of “rent a Director” type). He was later replaced by another long term associate and all shares transferred (this chap being one involved in the dodgy loan charge firms and under investigation by HMRC).
3. After Medpro was awarded the £200m+ contract Barrowman was involved in negotiations with suppliers abroad.
4. Barrowman then personally received a payment of c.£60m from Medpro into a bank account on Isle of Man (I am not sure if that was a personal account or business account). No tax was paid on this as offshore.
5. Barrowman then paid £29m into an offshore Trust Fund that benefits Mone and her children (and possibly his children from earlier marriage). No tax was paid on this as offshore (UK Trust Funds can only receive £650k per year tax free).
So the question is why would both Barrowman and Mone hide their involvement in Medpro? They claim privacy! I say concern over the HMRC investigation into other business ventures and worry that would halt any contract being awarded!
I think of the requirements any business goes through to become a supplier to UK government departments and the criteria that’s set. It’s astonishing that a company set up only 5 days prior would be awarded a £200 million contract.
When I say “astonishing” I mean “outrageous/suspicious”"
. I would have thought that to most people saving lives in a time of national crisis takes priority over spending months checking contracts and letting many people die.
It may be immoral to profiteer from Covid but was anything done that was illegal.? The have already apologised for failing to make certain disclosures and in addition have offered a settlement which the government regarded as being too low |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 42 weeks ago
|
" I would have thought that to most people saving lives in a time of national crisis takes priority over spending months checking contracts and letting many people die.
It may be immoral to profiteer from Covid but was anything done that was illegal.? The have already apologised for failing to make certain disclosures and in addition have offered a settlement which the government regarded as being too low "
Saving lives in a time of national crisis is a priority. The kit provided was defective and saved nobody. It’s a crisis so all the more reason to spend the money we had properly. They shouldn’t have been given a contract because they couldn’t provide what was required.
The other question I have is: anything I’ve ever supplied to UK Government departments has been inspected before payment is sent. Why was none of this critical lifesaving PPE inspected to make sure it was up to standard before payment was sent?
The NHS has to take some portion of blame here for not inspecting the goods. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 42 weeks ago
|
To summarise:
They are a pair of profiteering, tax avoiding scumbags.
They provided sub standard equipment that, if used, would have risk people’s lives and they don’t give two fucks about that.
They used privilege to profiteer from COVID despite not having a single minute of experience in the medical PPE market.
They lied and lied again to avoid scrutiny. They never came forward an apologised for what they did, only for “lying about it to media” and that was laden with excuses.
Fuck em. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple 42 weeks ago
Brighton |
Oh Pat Pat Pat, you are such a good wind up merchant. The jedi master of wind up...
"Just using basic common sense the 7500 tax payers to whom I refer must have known that what they were doing was morally wrong and unacceptable . A quick phone call to HMRC would have clarified the"
So do you think it was “morally wrong and unacceptable” for Mone and Barrowman to make £60m pure profit, a 30% net profit, out of a publicly/tax funded contract during a time of (inter)national emergency?
You know that during WWII, war profiteering was a crime right? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple 42 weeks ago
Brighton |
"While the NCA have to compile evidence for their case, even a blind man can see what happened with PPE Medpro.
They wanted to keep Barrowman’s involvement quiet due to his troubles with HMRC (AML and The Knox Group). So the fact he was the Person with Significant Control was hidden/not declared when the company was registered five days before Mone made her approach to the VIP lane via Gove. Shady as shit. . However at the time the government was in desperation need of PPE and Michelle Mone was in a position to supply it. Saving lives was a priority . If everything was so obvious as people are claiming why did Civil Servants not flag it at the time?
Michelle Mone has already offered a settlement but it was declined . Maybe some lawyers just want to line their own pockets and drag the case out .
I prefer to assume that people are not guilty unto a case is proved in court.
As things stand it looks like various public bodies are crawling all over the affairs of Michelle Mone and Douglas Barrowman .
No doubt should they have done anything wrong with the number of people crawling all over their affairs they will face charges.
It would seem that some people would like to convict them regardless of evidence
At least 7500 tax payers attempted to use a scheme promoted by Doug Barrowman to reduce their tax liability . The good news is that HMRC ruled to scheme to be invalid for the purposes of saving tax and anyone involved in these schemes will now have to pay the correct amount of tax due .
Great news for honest law abiding tax payers. Maybe we should name and shame the 7500 people who attempted to avoid paying tax ..
Oh dear oh dear Pat mi ol’ mate!
The NCA don’t investigate people for no reason. You know that right? This isn’t about the PPE itself. Keep watching.
I’m not even going to get into all that was wrong with the VIP Lane or the point that if Mone/Barrowman were, as you imply, simply stepping in to help the country in its’ hour of need, then why taking a 30% pure profit is obscene. It is all rather tiresome to keep repeating and you can read the other threads on this.
As for the 7500 tax avoiders. Be aware that there have been several suicides as a result of the way HMRC chose to investigate and aggressively pursue them over the “Loan Charge”. All the while Barrowman was getting off scott free. His companies persuaded freelancers that his scheme(s) were perfectly legal. Now I think if it seems too good to be true then it is, but Barrowman and colleagues should be held to account as much as the freelance contractors, and Barrowman made significantly more money from it then the contractors did. . I would prefer to evaluate the evidence before assuming anyone is guilty . Once all the evidence is presented to a court a decision can then be made ( though courts and juries do not always get the decisions correct , we have more than a few miscarriages of justice .
Correct decisions can always be made with the benefit of hindsight. As things stand Michelle Mone had access to PPE during a time of world wide shortages and could probably have sold it to numerous other parties throughout the world. Maybe those so keen to criticise Michelle Mone should advise us how many people they would allow to die whilst more competitive terms were negotiated. There was hardly a surplus of PPE.
The government always made it clear that the schemes would be audited after the event and this is exactly what has happened. Any company taking advantage of the scheme would be pursued
Once all the facts are made public the general population will be in a better position to judge if Michellle Mone did anything wrong . She has already attempted to settle the matter. I always assume that people are innocent unto proved guilty.
What we do know is that at least 7500 tax payers attempted to take advantage of schemes promoted by Douglas Barrowman . At least the governmen have recovered to amounts avoided from the tax payers concerned . With regard to the ones who you claim to have committed suicide as a result of these investigations why did other family members not help them out . Had they no savings or house to sell ? People involved in these schemes have no sympathy from me.
I drive a secondhand car which is eleven years old and 127000 on the clock. Millions of hard working UK citizens are in the same position as me . I am in regular contact with care workers and lower paid members of the population.
As we all pay our taxes on a paye basis no one should express any sympathy towards those who choose not to . Clearly 7500 people thought otherwise
You ‘assume’ that Mone is not guilty yet you ‘assume’ 7,500 people tried to avoid paying taxes?
The world according to pat is a truly skewed one... Maybe most people would like to see the evidence before passing judgement. Promoting a scheme and actively participating in it are two entirely different concepts.
Surely we should be thankfully that the plans of 7500 to pay a ridiculously reduced tax rate were foiled "
Are Barrowman and his companies also responsible for promoting/providing the loan schemes these 7500 people used? Are Barrowman and his companies guilty of claiming the loan schemes were perfectly legitimate? So what is happening to Barrowman in that regard?
Also, a little side note. These loan schemes at the time were not explicitly illegal. They exploited a loophole in our ever complex tax code. The issue why the loan charge issue has become so contentious (and why several people have committed suicide) is that HMRC have decided to make it retrospective going back years and charging penalties and interest making it impossible to pay back.
Stop and think about that for a moment. Even though someone did something that was not actually illegal at the time (avoidance not evasion so bending but not breaking an explicit law), the HMRC are retrospectively changing the law! Think of the implications of that!
And even if you still support that, then why did they go after the contractors and not the scheme providers for years? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 42 weeks ago
|
"Oh Pat Pat Pat, you are such a good wind up merchant. The jedi master of wind up...
Just using basic common sense the 7500 tax payers to whom I refer must have known that what they were doing was morally wrong and unacceptable . A quick phone call to HMRC would have clarified the
So do you think it was “morally wrong and unacceptable” for Mone and Barrowman to make £60m pure profit, a 30% net profit, out of a publicly/tax funded contract during a time of (inter)national emergency?
You know that during WWII, war profiteering was a crime right?"
30% net profit is quite low.
I have no issue with people who provided equipment getting paid and making a decent profit.
It’s about the fact that kit was unusable and this must have been evident from a very early stage.
And that political influence was used to win a massive contract for someone who was unfit to deliver on it (and unsurprisingly failed to provide). |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple 42 weeks ago
Brighton |
"It looks like there were at least 7000 to 8000 teachers , agency nurses, IT contractors and other other self employed professionals prepared to avoid or not pay the full amount of tax due on their earbings . These so called professionals were happy to use Doug Barrowman , the husband of Michelle Mone in order to reduce their tax liability by dubious means .
The good news is that HMRC caught up with them and they are bring pursued for the full amounts due. At least justice is now being served .
He’s a horrific creature. Got to ask why the government paid someone in an offshore account in the first place. Surely we can set payment terms?
As I understand it:
1. Barrowman set up PPE Medpro UK registering in Companies House 5 days before Mone approached Gove/VIP Lane.
2. There was no declaration that Barrowman was a Person with Significant Control or that the actual ownership of Medpro UK was either Barrowman or an Isle of Man registered company. Instead the Director and only shareholder declared was a long term business associate of Barrowman (a kind of “rent a Director” type). He was later replaced by another long term associate and all shares transferred (this chap being one involved in the dodgy loan charge firms and under investigation by HMRC).
3. After Medpro was awarded the £200m+ contract Barrowman was involved in negotiations with suppliers abroad.
4. Barrowman then personally received a payment of c.£60m from Medpro into a bank account on Isle of Man (I am not sure if that was a personal account or business account). No tax was paid on this as offshore.
5. Barrowman then paid £29m into an offshore Trust Fund that benefits Mone and her children (and possibly his children from earlier marriage). No tax was paid on this as offshore (UK Trust Funds can only receive £650k per year tax free).
So the question is why would both Barrowman and Mone hide their involvement in Medpro? They claim privacy! I say concern over the HMRC investigation into other business ventures and worry that would halt any contract being awarded!
I think of the requirements any business goes through to become a supplier to UK government departments and the criteria that’s set. It’s astonishing that a company set up only 5 days prior would be awarded a £200 million contract.
When I say “astonishing” I mean “outrageous/suspicious”. I would have thought that to most people saving lives in a time of national crisis takes priority over spending months checking contracts and letting many people die.
It may be immoral to profiteer from Covid but was anything done that was illegal.? The have already apologised for failing to make certain disclosures and in addition have offered a settlement which the government regarded as being too low "
It is illegal to fallsify or hide the ownership of a company. It is fraud. The NCA are not interested in the PPE or the cost, or the profit, or the quality yadda yadda, they are interested in people appearing to access public funds through fraudulent means.
The NCA case is separate from DHSC suing PPE Medpro for the quality of the PPE. Keep up Pat! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple 42 weeks ago
Brighton |
"Oh Pat Pat Pat, you are such a good wind up merchant. The jedi master of wind up...
Just using basic common sense the 7500 tax payers to whom I refer must have known that what they were doing was morally wrong and unacceptable . A quick phone call to HMRC would have clarified the
So do you think it was “morally wrong and unacceptable” for Mone and Barrowman to make £60m pure profit, a 30% net profit, out of a publicly/tax funded contract during a time of (inter)national emergency?
You know that during WWII, war profiteering was a crime right?
30% net profit is quite low.
I have no issue with people who provided equipment getting paid and making a decent profit.
It’s about the fact that kit was unusable and this must have been evident from a very early stage.
And that political influence was used to win a massive contract for someone who was unfit to deliver on it (and unsurprisingly failed to provide)."
At the risk of a discussion on what actually is net profit, that was pure profit for Barrowman. Not the money PPE Medpro made on the contract. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 42 weeks ago
|
"
At the risk of a discussion on what actually is net profit, that was pure profit for Barrowman. Not the money PPE Medpro made on the contract."
Let’s not have that convo because it could get very, very dull. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple 42 weeks ago
Brighton |
"
At the risk of a discussion on what actually is net profit, that was pure profit for Barrowman. Not the money PPE Medpro made on the contract.
Let’s not have that convo because it could get very, very dull."
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple 42 weeks ago
Brighton |
Oh dear, Barrowman/Mone are not having a good year!
“The wealthy husband of Baroness Mone went on trial for tax fraud yesterday after failing to get the case thrown out.
Doug Barrowman and six co-defendants are on trial in Spain in a £5m embezzlement case. Bra tycoon Michelle Mone was not with her 58-year-old husband in court, who faces five and a half years in jail if found guilty. The pair are separately under investigation for fraud by the National Crime Agency for their part in a £200m “VIP lane” PPE deal. Around £75m of their assets have been frozen by court order but the pair deny all wrongdoing.” |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Oh dear, Barrowman/Mone are not having a good year!
“The wealthy husband of Baroness Mone went on trial for tax fraud yesterday after failing to get the case thrown out.
Doug Barrowman and six co-defendants are on trial in Spain in a £5m embezzlement case. Bra tycoon Michelle Mone was not with her 58-year-old husband in court, who faces five and a half years in jail if found guilty. The pair are separately under investigation for fraud by the National Crime Agency for their part in a £200m “VIP lane” PPE deal. Around £75m of their assets have been frozen by court order but the pair deny all wrongdoing.”"
Hope he gets jailed |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Oh dear, Barrowman/Mone are not having a good year!
“The wealthy husband of Baroness Mone went on trial for tax fraud yesterday after failing to get the case thrown out.
Doug Barrowman and six co-defendants are on trial in Spain in a £5m embezzlement case. Bra tycoon Michelle Mone was not with her 58-year-old husband in court, who faces five and a half years in jail if found guilty. The pair are separately under investigation for fraud by the National Crime Agency for their part in a £200m “VIP lane” PPE deal. Around £75m of their assets have been frozen by court order but the pair deny all wrongdoing.”"
. Hello. You forgot to mention that he and partners were cleared of any wrongdoing in an earlier civil case .
The case to which you refer relates to the validity of an invoice raised in 2008 and what degree of control he had over it. He previously applied to have the case thrown out as it should be timebarred .
No one is able to make an informed judgement without hearing all the evidence and everyone is innocent unto proved guilty .
Let's hope HMRC have made full recovery from the 7500 contractors who tried to utilise his schemes . |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Oh dear, Barrowman/Mone are not having a good year!
“The wealthy husband of Baroness Mone went on trial for tax fraud yesterday after failing to get the case thrown out.
Doug Barrowman and six co-defendants are on trial in Spain in a £5m embezzlement case. Bra tycoon Michelle Mone was not with her 58-year-old husband in court, who faces five and a half years in jail if found guilty. The pair are separately under investigation for fraud by the National Crime Agency for their part in a £200m “VIP lane” PPE deal. Around £75m of their assets have been frozen by court order but the pair deny all wrongdoing.”. Hello. You forgot to mention that he and partners were cleared of any wrongdoing in an earlier civil case .
The case to which you refer relates to the validity of an invoice raised in 2008 and what degree of control he had over it. He previously applied to have the case thrown out as it should be timebarred .
No one is able to make an informed judgement without hearing all the evidence and everyone is innocent unto proved guilty .
Let's hope HMRC have made full recovery from the 7500 contractors who tried to utilise his schemes . "
Still hope he gets jailed |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple 42 weeks ago
Brighton |
"Oh dear, Barrowman/Mone are not having a good year!
“The wealthy husband of Baroness Mone went on trial for tax fraud yesterday after failing to get the case thrown out.
Doug Barrowman and six co-defendants are on trial in Spain in a £5m embezzlement case. Bra tycoon Michelle Mone was not with her 58-year-old husband in court, who faces five and a half years in jail if found guilty. The pair are separately under investigation for fraud by the National Crime Agency for their part in a £200m “VIP lane” PPE deal. Around £75m of their assets have been frozen by court order but the pair deny all wrongdoing.”. Hello. You forgot to mention that he and partners were cleared of any wrongdoing in an earlier civil case .
The case to which you refer relates to the validity of an invoice raised in 2008 and what degree of control he had over it. He previously applied to have the case thrown out as it should be timebarred .
No one is able to make an informed judgement without hearing all the evidence and everyone is innocent unto proved guilty .
Let's hope HMRC have made full recovery from the 7500 contractors who tried to utilise his schemes . "
Have you heard all the evidence before passing judgement on the 7500? Double standards me thinks Pat!
Also I note you avoided answering the point on “morally wrong and unacceptable” so yet more double standards!
Ol’ Dougie keeps getting into trouble with the authorities doesn’t he! I wonder if his business practices are a bit dodgy? I bet Mich is getting a wee bit annoyed! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Oh dear, Barrowman/Mone are not having a good year!
“The wealthy husband of Baroness Mone went on trial for tax fraud yesterday after failing to get the case thrown out.
Doug Barrowman and six co-defendants are on trial in Spain in a £5m embezzlement case. Bra tycoon Michelle Mone was not with her 58-year-old husband in court, who faces five and a half years in jail if found guilty. The pair are separately under investigation for fraud by the National Crime Agency for their part in a £200m “VIP lane” PPE deal. Around £75m of their assets have been frozen by court order but the pair deny all wrongdoing.”. Hello. You forgot to mention that he and partners were cleared of any wrongdoing in an earlier civil case .
The case to which you refer relates to the validity of an invoice raised in 2008 and what degree of control he had over it. He previously applied to have the case thrown out as it should be timebarred .
No one is able to make an informed judgement without hearing all the evidence and everyone is innocent unto proved guilty .
Let's hope HMRC have made full recovery from the 7500 contractors who tried to utilise his schemes .
Have you heard all the evidence before passing judgement on the 7500? Double standards me thinks Pat!
Also I note you avoided answering the point on “morally wrong and unacceptable” so yet more double standards!
Ol’ Dougie keeps getting into trouble with the authorities doesn’t he! I wonder if his business practices are a bit dodgy? I bet Mich is getting a wee bit annoyed!"
.Why would I need to hear all the evidence when it is a recovery ( not a criminal case ?) Did any of the 7500 contractors who utilised the scheme phone HMRC and ask was the scheme valid . ? What did they put on their tax return and did they add a note stating that they were participating in such a scheme ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple 42 weeks ago
Brighton |
"Oh dear, Barrowman/Mone are not having a good year!
“The wealthy husband of Baroness Mone went on trial for tax fraud yesterday after failing to get the case thrown out.
Doug Barrowman and six co-defendants are on trial in Spain in a £5m embezzlement case. Bra tycoon Michelle Mone was not with her 58-year-old husband in court, who faces five and a half years in jail if found guilty. The pair are separately under investigation for fraud by the National Crime Agency for their part in a £200m “VIP lane” PPE deal. Around £75m of their assets have been frozen by court order but the pair deny all wrongdoing.”. Hello. You forgot to mention that he and partners were cleared of any wrongdoing in an earlier civil case .
The case to which you refer relates to the validity of an invoice raised in 2008 and what degree of control he had over it. He previously applied to have the case thrown out as it should be timebarred .
No one is able to make an informed judgement without hearing all the evidence and everyone is innocent unto proved guilty .
Let's hope HMRC have made full recovery from the 7500 contractors who tried to utilise his schemes .
Have you heard all the evidence before passing judgement on the 7500? Double standards me thinks Pat!
Also I note you avoided answering the point on “morally wrong and unacceptable” so yet more double standards!
Ol’ Dougie keeps getting into trouble with the authorities doesn’t he! I wonder if his business practices are a bit dodgy? I bet Mich is getting a wee bit annoyed!.Why would I need to hear all the evidence when it is a recovery ( not a criminal case ?) Did any of the 7500 contractors who utilised the scheme phone HMRC and ask was the scheme valid . ? What did they put on their tax return and did they add a note stating that they were participating in such a scheme ? "
You need to do more research Pat. Search “Loan Charge Action Group” for starters. I think you’ll find that people did declare on their tax return and at the time these were accepted by HMRC. This is retrospective action. You’ll also find cases where the contractor was mandated by the hiring organisation to use a specific agency who in turn mandated the use of a specific umbrella company (ie Barrowman’s companies, one of which was AML I think). They were assured by these umbrellas all was above board (and in fact AT THE TIME a loan mechanism WAS NOT illegal but did play fast and loose with tax rules which had not caught up). HMRC subsequently (in some cases 20 years later) decided they were illegal and changed the law so they could apply retrospective taxation, fines, and interest.
Regardless though, my sympathy for these contractors only goes so far as the “too good to be true” maxim comes to mind, and yes, had it been me I would have been very sceptical and checked (by the way some claim they did check with HMRC and were told it was within the rules).
But that still does not explain why Barrowman was not pursued and the contractors were? Eventually after a lot of pressure AML (may have been Knox Group) were told to collaborate in the investigation and failed to properly disclose receiving a fine of c.£150k with business associate Mr Lancaster implicated (who then went on to be replacement Director for PPE Medpro).
What this actually does (Loan Charge, Spanish Tax Evasion Court Case, PPE DHSC case, NCA investigation) is build a picture showing a pattern of dodgy behaviour and business practices. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 42 weeks ago
|
What happened about the incident when someone died when 2 boats collided? Was someone pissed up at the wheel, enjoying the good life supplying dodgy ppe kit that they knew nothing about 5 days earlier,.From tax avoidance schemes using umbrella companies to providing life saving kit while avoiding paying tax on vast profit. Those that passed away during lockdown must be spinning in their graves . And guess who is back in the limelight? Yep, Cameron who got her in the Lords. What a joke. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 42 weeks ago
|
"Oh dear, Barrowman/Mone are not having a good year!
“The wealthy husband of Baroness Mone went on trial for tax fraud yesterday after failing to get the case thrown out.
Doug Barrowman and six co-defendants are on trial in Spain in a £5m embezzlement case. Bra tycoon Michelle Mone was not with her 58-year-old husband in court, who faces five and a half years in jail if found guilty. The pair are separately under investigation for fraud by the National Crime Agency for their part in a £200m “VIP lane” PPE deal. Around £75m of their assets have been frozen by court order but the pair deny all wrongdoing.”. Hello. You forgot to mention that he and partners were cleared of any wrongdoing in an earlier civil case .
The case to which you refer relates to the validity of an invoice raised in 2008 and what degree of control he had over it. He previously applied to have the case thrown out as it should be timebarred .
No one is able to make an informed judgement without hearing all the evidence and everyone is innocent unto proved guilty .
Let's hope HMRC have made full recovery from the 7500 contractors who tried to utilise his schemes .
Have you heard all the evidence before passing judgement on the 7500? Double standards me thinks Pat!
Also I note you avoided answering the point on “morally wrong and unacceptable” so yet more double standards!
Ol’ Dougie keeps getting into trouble with the authorities doesn’t he! I wonder if his business practices are a bit dodgy? I bet Mich is getting a wee bit annoyed!.Why would I need to hear all the evidence when it is a recovery ( not a criminal case ?) Did any of the 7500 contractors who utilised the scheme phone HMRC and ask was the scheme valid . ? What did they put on their tax return and did they add a note stating that they were participating in such a scheme ?
You need to do more research Pat. Search “Loan Charge Action Group” for starters. I think you’ll find that people did declare on their tax return and at the time these were accepted by HMRC. This is retrospective action. You’ll also find cases where the contractor was mandated by the hiring organisation to use a specific agency who in turn mandated the use of a specific umbrella company (ie Barrowman’s companies, one of which was AML I think). They were assured by these umbrellas all was above board (and in fact AT THE TIME a loan mechanism WAS NOT illegal but did play fast and loose with tax rules which had not caught up). HMRC subsequently (in some cases 20 years later) decided they were illegal and changed the law so they could apply retrospective taxation, fines, and interest.
Regardless though, my sympathy for these contractors only goes so far as the “too good to be true” maxim comes to mind, and yes, had it been me I would have been very sceptical and checked (by the way some claim they did check with HMRC and were told it was within the rules).
But that still does not explain why Barrowman was not pursued and the contractors were? Eventually after a lot of pressure AML (may have been Knox Group) were told to collaborate in the investigation and failed to properly disclose receiving a fine of c.£150k with business associate Mr Lancaster implicated (who then went on to be replacement Director for PPE Medpro).
What this actually does (Loan Charge, Spanish Tax Evasion Court Case, PPE DHSC case, NCA investigation) is build a picture showing a pattern of dodgy behaviour and business practices. "
I agree the initial schemes were legal by letter (tho not spirit).
And the loan charge was a nuts way to try and recover that loop hole.
But the real scandal imo is Bsrrowmans companies pushed a scheme that was not legal after that to avoid the charge. Which appears fraudulent .... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple 42 weeks ago
Brighton |
"Oh dear, Barrowman/Mone are not having a good year!
“The wealthy husband of Baroness Mone went on trial for tax fraud yesterday after failing to get the case thrown out.
Doug Barrowman and six co-defendants are on trial in Spain in a £5m embezzlement case. Bra tycoon Michelle Mone was not with her 58-year-old husband in court, who faces five and a half years in jail if found guilty. The pair are separately under investigation for fraud by the National Crime Agency for their part in a £200m “VIP lane” PPE deal. Around £75m of their assets have been frozen by court order but the pair deny all wrongdoing.”. Hello. You forgot to mention that he and partners were cleared of any wrongdoing in an earlier civil case .
The case to which you refer relates to the validity of an invoice raised in 2008 and what degree of control he had over it. He previously applied to have the case thrown out as it should be timebarred .
No one is able to make an informed judgement without hearing all the evidence and everyone is innocent unto proved guilty .
Let's hope HMRC have made full recovery from the 7500 contractors who tried to utilise his schemes .
Have you heard all the evidence before passing judgement on the 7500? Double standards me thinks Pat!
Also I note you avoided answering the point on “morally wrong and unacceptable” so yet more double standards!
Ol’ Dougie keeps getting into trouble with the authorities doesn’t he! I wonder if his business practices are a bit dodgy? I bet Mich is getting a wee bit annoyed!.Why would I need to hear all the evidence when it is a recovery ( not a criminal case ?) Did any of the 7500 contractors who utilised the scheme phone HMRC and ask was the scheme valid . ? What did they put on their tax return and did they add a note stating that they were participating in such a scheme ?
You need to do more research Pat. Search “Loan Charge Action Group” for starters. I think you’ll find that people did declare on their tax return and at the time these were accepted by HMRC. This is retrospective action. You’ll also find cases where the contractor was mandated by the hiring organisation to use a specific agency who in turn mandated the use of a specific umbrella company (ie Barrowman’s companies, one of which was AML I think). They were assured by these umbrellas all was above board (and in fact AT THE TIME a loan mechanism WAS NOT illegal but did play fast and loose with tax rules which had not caught up). HMRC subsequently (in some cases 20 years later) decided they were illegal and changed the law so they could apply retrospective taxation, fines, and interest.
Regardless though, my sympathy for these contractors only goes so far as the “too good to be true” maxim comes to mind, and yes, had it been me I would have been very sceptical and checked (by the way some claim they did check with HMRC and were told it was within the rules).
But that still does not explain why Barrowman was not pursued and the contractors were? Eventually after a lot of pressure AML (may have been Knox Group) were told to collaborate in the investigation and failed to properly disclose receiving a fine of c.£150k with business associate Mr Lancaster implicated (who then went on to be replacement Director for PPE Medpro).
What this actually does (Loan Charge, Spanish Tax Evasion Court Case, PPE DHSC case, NCA investigation) is build a picture showing a pattern of dodgy behaviour and business practices. I agree the initial schemes were legal by letter (tho not spirit).
And the loan charge was a nuts way to try and recover that loop hole.
But the real scandal imo is Bsrrowmans companies pushed a scheme that was not legal after that to avoid the charge. Which appears fraudulent .... "
Indeed but according to some you should go after the monkeys not the organ grinder  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 42 weeks ago
|
"Oh dear, Barrowman/Mone are not having a good year!
“The wealthy husband of Baroness Mone went on trial for tax fraud yesterday after failing to get the case thrown out.
Doug Barrowman and six co-defendants are on trial in Spain in a £5m embezzlement case. Bra tycoon Michelle Mone was not with her 58-year-old husband in court, who faces five and a half years in jail if found guilty. The pair are separately under investigation for fraud by the National Crime Agency for their part in a £200m “VIP lane” PPE deal. Around £75m of their assets have been frozen by court order but the pair deny all wrongdoing.”. Hello. You forgot to mention that he and partners were cleared of any wrongdoing in an earlier civil case .
The case to which you refer relates to the validity of an invoice raised in 2008 and what degree of control he had over it. He previously applied to have the case thrown out as it should be timebarred .
No one is able to make an informed judgement without hearing all the evidence and everyone is innocent unto proved guilty .
Let's hope HMRC have made full recovery from the 7500 contractors who tried to utilise his schemes .
Have you heard all the evidence before passing judgement on the 7500? Double standards me thinks Pat!
Also I note you avoided answering the point on “morally wrong and unacceptable” so yet more double standards!
Ol’ Dougie keeps getting into trouble with the authorities doesn’t he! I wonder if his business practices are a bit dodgy? I bet Mich is getting a wee bit annoyed!.Why would I need to hear all the evidence when it is a recovery ( not a criminal case ?) Did any of the 7500 contractors who utilised the scheme phone HMRC and ask was the scheme valid . ? What did they put on their tax return and did they add a note stating that they were participating in such a scheme ?
You need to do more research Pat. Search “Loan Charge Action Group” for starters. I think you’ll find that people did declare on their tax return and at the time these were accepted by HMRC. This is retrospective action. You’ll also find cases where the contractor was mandated by the hiring organisation to use a specific agency who in turn mandated the use of a specific umbrella company (ie Barrowman’s companies, one of which was AML I think). They were assured by these umbrellas all was above board (and in fact AT THE TIME a loan mechanism WAS NOT illegal but did play fast and loose with tax rules which had not caught up). HMRC subsequently (in some cases 20 years later) decided they were illegal and changed the law so they could apply retrospective taxation, fines, and interest.
Regardless though, my sympathy for these contractors only goes so far as the “too good to be true” maxim comes to mind, and yes, had it been me I would have been very sceptical and checked (by the way some claim they did check with HMRC and were told it was within the rules).
But that still does not explain why Barrowman was not pursued and the contractors were? Eventually after a lot of pressure AML (may have been Knox Group) were told to collaborate in the investigation and failed to properly disclose receiving a fine of c.£150k with business associate Mr Lancaster implicated (who then went on to be replacement Director for PPE Medpro).
What this actually does (Loan Charge, Spanish Tax Evasion Court Case, PPE DHSC case, NCA investigation) is build a picture showing a pattern of dodgy behaviour and business practices. I agree the initial schemes were legal by letter (tho not spirit).
And the loan charge was a nuts way to try and recover that loop hole.
But the real scandal imo is Bsrrowmans companies pushed a scheme that was not legal after that to avoid the charge. Which appears fraudulent ....
Indeed but according to some you should go after the monkeys not the organ grinder "
as they say in Number 10, look after the boat people, and the people smugglers will look after themselves. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Oh dear, Barrowman/Mone are not having a good year!
“The wealthy husband of Baroness Mone went on trial for tax fraud yesterday after failing to get the case thrown out.
Doug Barrowman and six co-defendants are on trial in Spain in a £5m embezzlement case. Bra tycoon Michelle Mone was not with her 58-year-old husband in court, who faces five and a half years in jail if found guilty. The pair are separately under investigation for fraud by the National Crime Agency for their part in a £200m “VIP lane” PPE deal. Around £75m of their assets have been frozen by court order but the pair deny all wrongdoing.”. Hello. You forgot to mention that he and partners were cleared of any wrongdoing in an earlier civil case .
The case to which you refer relates to the validity of an invoice raised in 2008 and what degree of control he had over it. He previously applied to have the case thrown out as it should be timebarred .
No one is able to make an informed judgement without hearing all the evidence and everyone is innocent unto proved guilty .
Let's hope HMRC have made full recovery from the 7500 contractors who tried to utilise his schemes .
Have you heard all the evidence before passing judgement on the 7500? Double standards me thinks Pat!
Also I note you avoided answering the point on “morally wrong and unacceptable” so yet more double standards!
Ol’ Dougie keeps getting into trouble with the authorities doesn’t he! I wonder if his business practices are a bit dodgy? I bet Mich is getting a wee bit annoyed!.Why would I need to hear all the evidence when it is a recovery ( not a criminal case ?) Did any of the 7500 contractors who utilised the scheme phone HMRC and ask was the scheme valid . ? What did they put on their tax return and did they add a note stating that they were participating in such a scheme ?
You need to do more research Pat. Search “Loan Charge Action Group” for starters. I think you’ll find that people did declare on their tax return and at the time these were accepted by HMRC. This is retrospective action. You’ll also find cases where the contractor was mandated by the hiring organisation to use a specific agency who in turn mandated the use of a specific umbrella company (ie Barrowman’s companies, one of which was AML I think). They were assured by these umbrellas all was above board (and in fact AT THE TIME a loan mechanism WAS NOT illegal but did play fast and loose with tax rules which had not caught up). HMRC subsequently (in some cases 20 years later) decided they were illegal and changed the law so they could apply retrospective taxation, fines, and interest.
Regardless though, my sympathy for these contractors only goes so far as the “too good to be true” maxim comes to mind, and yes, had it been me I would have been very sceptical and checked (by the way some claim they did check with HMRC and were told it was within the rules).
But that still does not explain why Barrowman was not pursued and the contractors were? Eventually after a lot of pressure AML (may have been Knox Group) were told to collaborate in the investigation and failed to properly disclose receiving a fine of c.£150k with business associate Mr Lancaster implicated (who then went on to be replacement Director for PPE Medpro).
What this actually does (Loan Charge, Spanish Tax Evasion Court Case, PPE DHSC case, NCA investigation) is build a picture showing a pattern of dodgy behaviour and business practices. I agree the initial schemes were legal by letter (tho not spirit).
And the loan charge was a nuts way to try and recover that loop hole.
But the real scandal imo is Bsrrowmans companies pushed a scheme that was not legal after that to avoid the charge. Which appears fraudulent ....
Indeed but according to some you should go after the monkeys not the organ grinder "
If someone published a plan on how to rob a bank it might be immoral but not illegal unless confidential information is disclosed.
If anyone was stupid enough to put the plan into action they would be committing a number of serious criminal offences, |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Oh dear, Barrowman/Mone are not having a good year!
“The wealthy husband of Baroness Mone went on trial for tax fraud yesterday after failing to get the case thrown out.
Doug Barrowman and six co-defendants are on trial in Spain in a £5m embezzlement case. Bra tycoon Michelle Mone was not with her 58-year-old husband in court, who faces five and a half years in jail if found guilty. The pair are separately under investigation for fraud by the National Crime Agency for their part in a £200m “VIP lane” PPE deal. Around £75m of their assets have been frozen by court order but the pair deny all wrongdoing.”. Hello. You forgot to mention that he and partners were cleared of any wrongdoing in an earlier civil case .
The case to which you refer relates to the validity of an invoice raised in 2008 and what degree of control he had over it. He previously applied to have the case thrown out as it should be timebarred .
No one is able to make an informed judgement without hearing all the evidence and everyone is innocent unto proved guilty .
Let's hope HMRC have made full recovery from the 7500 contractors who tried to utilise his schemes .
Have you heard all the evidence before passing judgement on the 7500? Double standards me thinks Pat!
Also I note you avoided answering the point on “morally wrong and unacceptable” so yet more double standards!
Ol’ Dougie keeps getting into trouble with the authorities doesn’t he! I wonder if his business practices are a bit dodgy? I bet Mich is getting a wee bit annoyed!.Why would I need to hear all the evidence when it is a recovery ( not a criminal case ?) Did any of the 7500 contractors who utilised the scheme phone HMRC and ask was the scheme valid . ? What did they put on their tax return and did they add a note stating that they were participating in such a scheme ?
You need to do more research Pat. Search “Loan Charge Action Group” for starters. I think you’ll find that people did declare on their tax return and at the time these were accepted by HMRC. This is retrospective action. You’ll also find cases where the contractor was mandated by the hiring organisation to use a specific agency who in turn mandated the use of a specific umbrella company (ie Barrowman’s companies, one of which was AML I think). They were assured by these umbrellas all was above board (and in fact AT THE TIME a loan mechanism WAS NOT illegal but did play fast and loose with tax rules which had not caught up). HMRC subsequently (in some cases 20 years later) decided they were illegal and changed the law so they could apply retrospective taxation, fines, and interest.
Regardless though, my sympathy for these contractors only goes so far as the “too good to be true” maxim comes to mind, and yes, had it been me I would have been very sceptical and checked (by the way some claim they did check with HMRC and were told it was within the rules).
But that still does not explain why Barrowman was not pursued and the contractors were? Eventually after a lot of pressure AML (may have been Knox Group) were told to collaborate in the investigation and failed to properly disclose receiving a fine of c.£150k with business associate Mr Lancaster implicated (who then went on to be replacement Director for PPE Medpro).
What this actually does (Loan Charge, Spanish Tax Evasion Court Case, PPE DHSC case, NCA investigation) is build a picture showing a pattern of dodgy behaviour and business practices. I agree the initial schemes were legal by letter (tho not spirit).
And the loan charge was a nuts way to try and recover that loop hole.
But the real scandal imo is Bsrrowmans companies pushed a scheme that was not legal after that to avoid the charge. Which appears fraudulent ....
Indeed but according to some you should go after the monkeys not the organ grinder If someone published a plan on how to rob a bank it might be immoral but not illegal unless confidential information is disclosed.
If anyone was stupid enough to put the plan into action they would be committing a number of serious criminal offences, "
They would still be complicit if the perpetrators used their plan and got caught..
Sane as those who publish race hate etc.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple 42 weeks ago
Brighton |
"Oh dear, Barrowman/Mone are not having a good year!
“The wealthy husband of Baroness Mone went on trial for tax fraud yesterday after failing to get the case thrown out.
Doug Barrowman and six co-defendants are on trial in Spain in a £5m embezzlement case. Bra tycoon Michelle Mone was not with her 58-year-old husband in court, who faces five and a half years in jail if found guilty. The pair are separately under investigation for fraud by the National Crime Agency for their part in a £200m “VIP lane” PPE deal. Around £75m of their assets have been frozen by court order but the pair deny all wrongdoing.”. Hello. You forgot to mention that he and partners were cleared of any wrongdoing in an earlier civil case .
The case to which you refer relates to the validity of an invoice raised in 2008 and what degree of control he had over it. He previously applied to have the case thrown out as it should be timebarred .
No one is able to make an informed judgement without hearing all the evidence and everyone is innocent unto proved guilty .
Let's hope HMRC have made full recovery from the 7500 contractors who tried to utilise his schemes .
Have you heard all the evidence before passing judgement on the 7500? Double standards me thinks Pat!
Also I note you avoided answering the point on “morally wrong and unacceptable” so yet more double standards!
Ol’ Dougie keeps getting into trouble with the authorities doesn’t he! I wonder if his business practices are a bit dodgy? I bet Mich is getting a wee bit annoyed!.Why would I need to hear all the evidence when it is a recovery ( not a criminal case ?) Did any of the 7500 contractors who utilised the scheme phone HMRC and ask was the scheme valid . ? What did they put on their tax return and did they add a note stating that they were participating in such a scheme ?
You need to do more research Pat. Search “Loan Charge Action Group” for starters. I think you’ll find that people did declare on their tax return and at the time these were accepted by HMRC. This is retrospective action. You’ll also find cases where the contractor was mandated by the hiring organisation to use a specific agency who in turn mandated the use of a specific umbrella company (ie Barrowman’s companies, one of which was AML I think). They were assured by these umbrellas all was above board (and in fact AT THE TIME a loan mechanism WAS NOT illegal but did play fast and loose with tax rules which had not caught up). HMRC subsequently (in some cases 20 years later) decided they were illegal and changed the law so they could apply retrospective taxation, fines, and interest.
Regardless though, my sympathy for these contractors only goes so far as the “too good to be true” maxim comes to mind, and yes, had it been me I would have been very sceptical and checked (by the way some claim they did check with HMRC and were told it was within the rules).
But that still does not explain why Barrowman was not pursued and the contractors were? Eventually after a lot of pressure AML (may have been Knox Group) were told to collaborate in the investigation and failed to properly disclose receiving a fine of c.£150k with business associate Mr Lancaster implicated (who then went on to be replacement Director for PPE Medpro).
What this actually does (Loan Charge, Spanish Tax Evasion Court Case, PPE DHSC case, NCA investigation) is build a picture showing a pattern of dodgy behaviour and business practices. I agree the initial schemes were legal by letter (tho not spirit).
And the loan charge was a nuts way to try and recover that loop hole.
But the real scandal imo is Bsrrowmans companies pushed a scheme that was not legal after that to avoid the charge. Which appears fraudulent ....
Indeed but according to some you should go after the monkeys not the organ grinder If someone published a plan on how to rob a bank it might be immoral but not illegal unless confidential information is disclosed.
If anyone was stupid enough to put the plan into action they would be committing a number of serious criminal offences, "
But if people had to pay fees to access and use that plan then what aye Pat? You really want to die on this hill? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It looks like there were at least 7000 to 8000 teachers , agency nurses, IT contractors and other other self employed professionals prepared to avoid or not pay the full amount of tax due on their earbings . These so called professionals were happy to use Doug Barrowman , the husband of Michelle Mone in order to reduce their tax liability by dubious means .
The good news is that HMRC caught up with them and they are bring pursued for the full amounts due. At least justice is now being served .
Earbings? Apologies. Earnings
Barrowman and Mone are crooks, I hope they get sent to jail "
The justice wouldn't be the small people who were advised and used their services being pursued and clobbered but the crooks who set-up the schemes to cause wholesale tax avoidance. There appears to be zero effort in pursuing them.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 42 weeks ago
|
"It looks like there were at least 7000 to 8000 teachers , agency nurses, IT contractors and other other self employed professionals prepared to avoid or not pay the full amount of tax due on their earbings . These so called professionals were happy to use Doug Barrowman , the husband of Michelle Mone in order to reduce their tax liability by dubious means .
The good news is that HMRC caught up with them and they are bring pursued for the full amounts due. At least justice is now being served .
Earbings? Apologies. Earnings
Barrowman and Mone are crooks, I hope they get sent to jail "
me too. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ornLordMan 41 weeks ago
Wiltshire and London |
"It looks like there were at least 7000 to 8000 teachers , agency nurses, IT contractors and other other self employed professionals prepared to avoid or not pay the full amount of tax due on their earbings . These so called professionals were happy to use Doug Barrowman , the husband of Michelle Mone in order to reduce their tax liability by dubious means .
The good news is that HMRC caught up with them and they are bring pursued for the full amounts due. At least justice is now being served .
Earbings? Apologies. Earnings
Barrowman and Mone are crooks, I hope they get sent to jail
me too."
Me too, but they shouldn't be exceptions. The trouble is that there are so many of these shysters around. I'd favour seizure of assets perhaps instead of a custodial sentence; that would be a way of raising funds for the public purse. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
.
