Jump to content
Manx Forums, Live Chat, Blogs & Classifieds for the Isle of Man
Declan

Applebys: Something or other about planes and VAT. CM says Panic!

Recommended Posts

I see the companies Hamiltons advisors set up for him to avoid paying tax were called 'Stealth'. Screams guilty to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JoeyDeaconsCat said:

It’s started already

The leasing structure behind Lewis Hamilton’s jet questioned 

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-41886607

Very detailed document audit posted up by the BBC.

Howard Quayle interview about half way down the page.

 

 

To be fair, he didn't do too bad, in this clip anyway.

Edited by gettafa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Phillip Dearden said:

[BUT the GDP figure for IOM companies does seem quite large so I do have a bit of doubt here]

 

Not sure about Murphy's figures but I have long been of the opinion that the VAT sharing agreement is why the IoM Govt where happy to accept the aircraft scheme and other similar ones here as they help increase the IoM GDP so we get a larger percentage of the VAT share. From memory when they were calculating the IoM VAT spend it was based on figures from IoM VAT registrations plus the household survey so it is IoM's interest to ensure that there is as much VATable business as possible and that household surveys were sent to potentially more affluent households.

Getting another 0.001% of the indirect tax revenue share is worth a fair bit for the IoM Govt and whilst the registration fees and legal/csps fees are a nice little bonus it is influencing the revenue split that I believe was a bigger driver for the IoM Govt 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Lost Login said:

Not sure about Murphy's figures but I have long been of the opinion that the VAT sharing agreement is why the IoM Govt where happy to accept the aircraft scheme and other similar ones here as they help increase the IoM GDP so we get a larger percentage of the VAT share. From memory when they were calculating the IoM VAT spend it was based on figures from IoM VAT registrations plus the household survey so it is IoM's interest to ensure that there is as much VATable business as possible and that household surveys were sent to potentially more affluent households.

Getting another 0.001% of the indirect tax revenue share is worth a fair bit for the IoM Govt and whilst the registration fees and legal/csps fees are a nice little bonus it is influencing the revenue split that I believe was a bigger driver for the IoM Govt 

You only have to compare VAT spend per head figures between here and the UK to know something is seriously wrong with the way we arrive at the numbers. I’m sure last time I looked ours was something like £10,000 a head higher than the UK. 

Edited by JoeyDeaconsCat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Manximus Aururaneus said:

So, Lewis Hamilton does not travel (fly) around the world to earn his living? Good luck with that one.

Have you actually read the article? Any big long words you would to have explained?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Lost Login said:

Not sure about Murphy's figures but I have long been of the opinion that the VAT sharing agreement is why the IoM Govt where happy to accept the aircraft scheme and other similar ones here as they help increase the IoM GDP so we get a larger percentage of the VAT share. From memory when they were calculating the IoM VAT spend it was based on figures from IoM VAT registrations plus the household survey so it is IoM's interest to ensure that there is as much VATable business as possible and that household surveys were sent to potentially more affluent households.

Getting another 0.001% of the indirect tax revenue share is worth a fair bit for the IoM Govt and whilst the registration fees and legal/csps fees are a nice little bonus it is influencing the revenue split that I believe was a bigger driver for the IoM Govt 

What are the other "similar" schemes you refer to?

We received the VAT survey and we are far from affluent!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a CSP/TSP practitioner I doubt the integrity of the arrangement as this basically appears to be self leasing and leasing to yourself I do not view is a business activity, no matter how you try and tart up with associate companies etc.

It is not as if this is should be a surprise to anybody in the IoM as for a long time there similar schemes with regard to yachts before HMRC caught on and the IoM had to close down. This is a link to the 2010 Practice note where IoM C&E stated that self leasing must stop  https://www.gov.im/media/338149/customs_practice_note_yachts.pdf

Clause 4 of that practice note describes unacceptable yacht leasing structures as being a yacht leased to an individual who funded the purchase of that yacht (directly or indirectly) or is leased to a person (or persons) connected to that individual. Replace yacht with aircraft or any other asset and you surely have the same thing all be it that the aircraft "self leasing" structure may be a bit more complicated than for yachts as the average costs is a bit more. From the FOI request figures you can calculate that the average aircraft imported cost about £17m net of VAT or £20.4 gross 

Over the years we lost business and clients as when asked about such schemes we advised clients that in my view they did not work as "self leasing" did not amount to a taxable supply. We would not therefore do. I don't know whether to be annoyed with firms who in my view appeared to be happy to take a much more liberal view so landing us or all with a bad name or with myself for not joining the gravy train.

In a nut shell in my opinion the structures stink! (Caveat to save being sued. Just because they stink does not mean it was illegal). Best guess what happens next? Another practice note from IoMC&E saying you have had your fun boys but now stop  

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NoTail said:

It might look like the IOM has encouraged him by sending their VAT men to meet him at 6.15am

Perhaps that was to ensure that the pilot met his slot time for wherever they were flying off to next??

The Customs people are quite often up and out early in the morning meeting boats on their way into Douglas & Ramsey harbours. I know, I was with a  group of fishing mates a couple of years back when we were met by three Customs personnel at 5am after we tied up at the small landing stage by the Lifeboat House.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting from Lord Gadhia, calling it fake and false news in the House of Lords: 

 

Lord Gadhia is a former managing director of private equity firm Blackstone and a board member of UK Financial Investments and UK Government Investments.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-41879690?ns_mchannel=social&ns_source=twitter&ns_campaign=bbc_live&ns_linkname=5a00b4e1e4b02d7b3a1c83ec%26'Fake and false news' - Lord Gadhia%26&ns_fee=0#post_5a00b4e1e4b02d7b3a1c83ec

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Lost Login said:

As a CSP/TSP practitioner I doubt the integrity of the arrangement as this basically appears to be self leasing and leasing to yourself I do not view is a business activity, no matter how you try and tart up with associate companies etc.

I agree this was always always going to be down to whether a leasing structure is a genuine commercial arrangement or not. If that is your view, and I dont disagree with you, if it’s not just a practice note after the reassessment then this is going to be expensive for the IOM and the owners. 

Edited by JoeyDeaconsCat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am very annoyed at this article from the daily fail 

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5055467/Lewis-Hamilton-avoided-VAT-16-5million-private-jet.html

 

Halfway down the article they have a box in blue which says 

 

How people use the Isle of Wight's tax rules to avoid paying VAT

 

They are still confusing us with the Isle of wight ;-)

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, JoeyDeaconsCat said:

I agree is was always down to whether a leasing structure is a genuine commercial arrangement or not. If that is your view, and I dont disagree with you, this is going to be expensive for the IOM and the owners. 

Probably same as last time around. Told to stop but everything that had gone before was not revisited.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...