© Three Raymond Buildings 2014 Tax Fraud and Confiscation Simon Farrell QC 3 rd October 2014 The...

© Three Raymond Buildings 2014

Tax Fraud and Confiscation Simon Farrell QC 3rd October 2014

• The MTIC story 2000-2006• The cost to the UK• The early MTICs and the ever expanding circles• Contra trading and double contra trading• The summer of 2006• The appeals in the Tribunal• The criminal prosecutions eg Euripus and Devout



• The issue in the First Tier Tax Tribunal• The focus is on the broker/exporter• The Kittel test • T. “knew or ought to have known” that the transaction

was connected to a tax loss• Features of the trade



•The changing focus of the criminal prosecutions•Buffers and brokers•The limited number of cases prosecuted•Disclosure issues/difficulties•The high success rates



• Criminal confiscation and tax fraud• The issues in section 76(4) POCA and 76(7)• What has D “obtained as a result of or in connection with his

criminal conduct” and what is the value• The overkill in the Ahmad case - £184.6 million• Tax loss of £12 million• Benefit of co-defendants £90 million each



• The solution in the Court of Appeal [2012] 1WLR 2335• The Ahmads had obtained the tax loss £12 million each• Proportionality• Ahmad in the Supreme Court judgement June 18th 2014• The confiscation “cap”• Enforcement



• Confiscation where are we now ?• Paulet ECHR 13th May 2014• R v Sale [2014] 1 WLR 663 (CA)• Bestel and others [2014] 1 WLR 457• Barnes v Eastenders Cash and Carry [2014] 2 WLR 1269• R v Harvey [2014] 1 WLR 124 (CA)• Hidden assets• Reform

© Three Raymond Buildings 2014 Tax Fraud and Confiscation Simon Farrell QC 3 rd October 2014 The...

Documents

Transcript of © Three Raymond Buildings 2014 Tax Fraud and Confiscation Simon Farrell QC 3 rd October 2014 The...