A TAX avoidance agency linked to the husband of PPE-scandal peer Michelle Mone is being wound up after it was hit with a £150,000 nice.
AML Tax (UK) Ltd, described as a part of the Isle of Man-based Knox Group arrange by Baroness Mone’s husband, Doug Barrowman, was penalised for not giving HMRC legally required info and is in liquidation. HMRC has stated AML “aggressively promoted tax avoidance schemes in the UK for years”.
Mr Barrowman and lingerie tycoon Baroness Mone are on the centre of a PPE storm after a car-crash BBC interview this month. In it, the peer admitted she lied to the press about her hyperlinks to PPE Medpro, a consortium led by her husband. And she admitted she stands to learn from its £60million revenue on a £202m pandemic deal beneath the Government’s “VIP Lane”, which she helped facilitate. PPE Medpro is being sued for breach of contract after allegedly supplying robes unfit for objective.
(
BBC)
Baroness Mone apologised within the BBC chat for denying her function however the couple’s look has been likened to Prince Andrew’s car-crash interview over his dealings with convicted intercourse offender Jeffrey Epstein. AML’s director, Arthur Lancaster, was a enterprise affiliate of the Duke of York. Companies House exhibits an order was made in January to wind up the agency, with the petitioner listed as creditor HMRC. It got here after HMRC introduced an Upper Tribunal Case over AML’s “failure to comply with formal information notices as part of a tax investigation”.
AML was fined £150,000 in March final 12 months. HMRC Counter Avoidance Director Mary Aiston stated on the time: “AML Tax used a series of tactics to try and frustrate efforts to work out the tax legally due, in a sustained campaign of non-compliance. I’m delighted their obstructive conduct has been penalised.”
The tribunal’s ruling stated Mr Lancaster appeared “evasive” and his proof was “confused, lacking in candour, in some respects incorrect and littered with inconsistencies”.
In January, HMRC printed particulars of 5 extra tax avoidance schemes, together with three promoted by AML. Mr Lancaster stated: “AML twice wrote to HMRC to offer to settle the fine and any outstanding tax liabilities. HMRC refused to engage and instead app-ointed liquidators. Despite the unjustified personal criticism the tribunal decided the case substantially in favour of the company. The penalty was less than 10% of that sought by HMRC.”
Mr Barrowman and Baroness Mone have been contacted for remark. HMRC stated: “We cannot comment on specific individuals or businesses.”