X

Sign Up

or

By signing up I agree to Property Tribes Terms and Conditions


Already a PT member? Log In

Sign Up

Sign Up With Facebook, Twitter, or Google

or


By signing up, I agree to Property Tribes Terms and Conditions


Already a PT member? Log In

Log In

or


Don't have an account? Sign Up

Forgot Password

To reset your password just enter the email address you registered with and we'll send you a link to access a new password.


Already a PT member? Log In

Don't have an account? Sign Up

  • Tax

    Tony Gimple (Hybrid) v Mark Alexander (BICT)

    Both Tony Gimple (Hybrid) and Mark Alexander (Incorporation via BICT) say their system is the best way to counter act Section 24 and both say the other's system wont work and may be illegal. Who do you believe is right if either and why?

    Both systems seem expensive to implement, so is either worth it?, ie Will either give cast iron guarantees that if HMRC finds these systems illegal, will they cover ALL expenses including fines

    0
    0

    I took advice from Three Tax Professionals

    and we covered the different ways that could be used to avoid S24

    I came to this my personal conclusion

    If the above measures could work why are the Large Accountancy practices not pushing them?

    My own Tax advisor an Ex NLA Rep and a landlord who is highly effected by S24 not using the measures

    as he says and I quote IF IT WAS THAT SIMPLE I WOULD BE DOING IT MYSELF NOW

    he isn't ? If its not good enough for him its not good enough for me

    so I have done the Landlord Shuffle the old fashioned way Selling and Buying Back at market value with all the costs

    I enjoy my life I don't want investigations from the HMRC thank you.

    1
    0

    Learn Change and Adapt ?????


    On behalf of Less Tax For Landlords, I can confirm that like any professional firm, we carry comprehensive professional indemnity insurance; and should HMRC launch an enquiry or investigation into your affairs insofar as it relates to work we have undertaken on your behalf, our insurers will meet such costs as are needed to defend and rebut the position.  In the unlikely event that we lose, our insurance cover would meet the cost of fines and penalties, if any, thus putting you back to your original position.

    You should please note that our professional indemnity insurance is not in aggregate, i.e. a fixed sum assured regardless of the number of claims.  Instead, our tax advisory and estate planning service cover is £2m per individual matter, specific tax and accountancy cover is £1.5m per individual matter, estate planning coverage to the tune of £1m per individual matter, and lastly £1m per individual matter for the business planning and mentoring side of things.

    Our covers are provided by UK rated FCA regulated carriers, the policy documents are available upon request, and meet the requirements of the relevant professional bodies.

    0
    0

    If you lose , do you refund your fees too so the client is put back into exactly the original position ?

    0
    0

    Tony If this is so straight forward and easy why are Large Accountancy Firms not offering there services

    I would have thought If you had the Backing of the NLA RLA ect and there recommendation this would go a long way

    to put investor names at rest with this

    I have insurance for my Car But I will do every thing I can to avoid a claim

    as You know a Tax investigation is not for the faint Hearted

    I'm sure it must be stressful and very worrying for it to happen

    No amount of Insurance could cover that aspect

    What I am saying is if this was more main stream and approved by HMRC im quite sure I would have jumped at this

    and may I say with the backing of the lenders too


    1
    0

    Learn Change and Adapt ?????


    I can't speak as to why 'large accountancy firm' don't offer their services; albeit the profession in general is reluctant to give advice (advice equals liability) and almost always acts on their client's instruction.

    Any HMRC investigation is stressful, and apart from our London offices being in the same building as HMRC, The Bailey Group (one of three business owners) is a successful and highly respected chartered accountancy practice of many years standing with an impeccable record with HMRC.  The Bailey Group has been successfully using hybrid tax and property planning for almost ten years now for property owning clients of all sizes, and HMRC are happy that it conforms to all the relevant rules.

    Moreover, everything we do is allowed under the Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), whereas nothing we do is a notifiable tax avoidance scheme as defined under the Declaration of Tax Avoidance Schemes (DOTAS) provisions, or otherwise falls foul of the General Anti-Abuse Rule (GAAR).

    To date, HMRC have never failed to agree our clients’ tax returns.

    We are NLA recognised suppliers.

    0
    0

    Thanks for that tony


    0
    0

    Learn Change and Adapt ?????

    Yes, thanks and big respect to Tony for coming on here - and for taking on business premises and proudly displaying the name 'Less Tax 4 Landlords' against FLOOR 14 where the other 30-odd floors display the name 'HMRC' whose staff occupy some 19,748m2 in the building.

    Admittedly, whilst I really like and trust Tony & Chris and the team, I still haven't taken the plunge - although I might do at the Landlord Investment Show in London tomorrow?

    0
    0

    Thank you, and please let me know if there's anything we can do to help.

    0
    0