Search results

in this case they did. but then HMRC decided the particular tax relief scheme was too popular, some of the investments *may* have been exploiting the tax break to generate a relief without a genuine investment in film. which may not have even been illegal or evasion, even if against the sprit...

if only that where the case. they have already shown their hand going in before a judgment (yep, assumption of guilt), and they are pursuing everyone involved in the vehicles concerned, which could as well be the self-employed taking up an investment for their retirement as a footballer or...

well yes, so why is it right for HMRC decide a investment is outside of the law before the completion of a judicial process. and while some of the investments using this tax relief may have been artificial companies, many where real businesses putting the money into the film industry, as the...

you seem to be confusing those at the top of the game earning millions with those in the middle and bottom who try to condense a career into two decades. this tax relief thats being targeted was open to anyone, there are many ordinary investors in the firing line. "thousands of people like you...

it is. or the governments. they (Brown in this case) create tax breaks to encourage investment in somthing. people take up the offer, then when its realised later that its been more popular than expected, HMRC decide its going to claw back the tax relief given. if its "avoidance" it was so...