Rafael F., overseas:
“I worked as an IT contractor in the UK from 2003 to 2011. From 2003 to 2007 I was PAYE, then moved to a DOTAS registered scheme between 2007 and 2010, and then worked through my own limited company till 2011.
In 2011 I relocated permanently with my wife and daughter, which had considerable financial impact on my circumstances. My child had not even been born at the time I was involved in the scheme in question. My current salary in my place of residence is a ¼ of what I was earning in the UK as a contractor, and the local currency has likewise lost almost ½ of its value against the British Pound. This makes the payment of the APN (with a potential 2nd on its way) incredibly difficult if not impossible to meet.
I rent a property in my country of residence, I do not own any property in the UK, nor do I have investments nor assets I can liquidate without substantial losses that would never be recouped even if I succeed at tribunal. As such payment of these APN will have an immeasurable and negative impact on the well-being of my family and I.
I have always been completely transparent with HMRC in my tax affairs and did not obscure any details surrounding my participation in the scheme. Had I been made aware of the conditions at the time I used the scheme I would very likely not have become involved at all however, this is exactly the point with this legislation in that they have retrospectively changed those very conditions.
HMRC have always had the necessary powers at their disposal to challenge DOTAS schemes yet have dragged their feet, and rather than admit they have failed, have retrospectively changed their own rules, with no regard whatsoever about the damage they will and have caused by doing do.
Being no longer resident in the UK limits what HMRC can seek to enforce for tax that is under dispute, nonetheless I still wish to do the right thing, follow the rule of law, and abide by the same principles and morals that I did when I lived in the UK.
This can hardly be said for HMRC retrospectively changing these rules to suit the government’s immediate agenda.
Looking at current media, the same politicians that seek to enforce these malignant laws are themselves guilty of breaking them, and twisting them to their own will. If the very politicians we elect adapt the law to benefit themselves, why then should I or anybody else continue to hold the UK in any regard?”