Hoban sidesteps Cable concerns over Ucis

As pointed out in the comments section of the previous article on this, it's not really tax avoidance, but the overemphasis of the tax reliefs legitimately available to SIPPs in order to distract the investor (or, for Hustle fans, the "mark") from the poor inherent quality of the investment. That is an issue for the FSA and advisers, not for HMRC or for anyone in HMT with a tax brief.

That said, I've had a few of those brush-off letters from the Treasury when I've felt HMRC aren't tackling an issue properly, and it is pretty frustrating...

Yes, it is tax avoidance; it isn't tax evasion.

I doubt whether Mr Hoban understands any financial products, and I feel that he is a liability in this Govt.

It isn't the investment that is being given the tax relief it is the SIPP.

Whether a particular investment is suitable or not is a matter for the client and their financial planner.

I spoke with an MP before the last election and he admitted that there really wasn't anyone in the conservative party who had any financial services knowledge or experience , which is just a little concerning !

I think that it is the FSA that needs to get to grips with this.

Its an investment advice issue more than a "whats allowed in a SIPP" issue.

Some clarity would be really nice!

So its OK to put a Nigerian Land Banking scam into a SIPP - Hoban doesn't want to know as it counts as "property". As has been said, the FSA needs to get to grips with this.

I agree that this is tax avoidance, indeed any relieved pension contribution is tax avoidance. I avoid tax at any and every opportunity. However neither this case nor my own tax dealings can be described as tax evasion.

How we can expect Mr Hoban to do his job I dont know.

The tax regime for SIPPs - and any other pension - allows total freedom of investment -but with potentially penal tax charges where investments are deemed to be "taxable property. The issue therefore is essentially about the suitability of the advice - not the tax regime for SIPPs. That said I've never understood how you can hold an unregulated investment in a "regulated" wrapper such as a SIPP. The FSA designed the regulatory regime for SIPPs - which I've always viewed as inappropriate - maybe now's the time for a review of this regime. |Otherwise it seems that the collision course between HMRC rules and FSA rules will continue.

Caveat emptor. At least advice on UCI schemes is regulated, if not the products themselves.

poor old Hoban, still out of his depth!

Hoban should go away and file for bankruptcy.... intellectual bankruptcy.

A sure-fire candidate for nincompoop of the year.

I agree with John Moret.

Action based on advice issues is required by the FSA, but making the Treasury aware is also prudent, so to be fobbed off with being pointed at the rules would be quite frustrating.

How about just taking out 50 percent from your pension? seems to be the thing going on at the moment.... some clever guy in spain and some pryamid selling going on in the uk, no fsa in sight ...non reg ? mmmmm

lt is sad that they do not want to know that some scams such as landbanking schemes in the 3rd world can attract 50% tax relief via a SIPP. When the thing is found to be of little or no value in years to come, surely this will hit the fan, and who will get the blame?? Those remaining IFSs will get all the blame whilst those who have promoted will have safely gone to ground. Hoban is being criminally negligent in turning a blind eye like an ostrich burying his head. Well, if this is true, when the kak does hit the fan Mr Hoban, it is now on record that it happened on your watch.

I've not heard about this particular dodgy piece of scammery, am I missing something?

In all seriousness, it might be nice for many IFAs to be in the vanguard of pointing out dubious investments to the FSA so they can take action to cap the future FSCS liability?

And of course if they don't rather a strong case for a judicial review as to why we are bearing the cost later.

So, if anyone can point me in the direction of this exciting investment opportunity, please do.

@ John

It seems you can get an unsolicited fax or e~mail from somebody in Nigeria/Ghana etc, who is the favourite cousin of a certain chief who has access to land which is being parcelled up in segments as there are billions of barrels of prime grade oil under each square yard, but this guy can't have his name on any of them. so for a few grand you can put a couple of square yards of this malaria infested swamp (sorry, l meant oilfield), into your SIPP and get 50% tax relief on the few £Thous you have "invested" and MArk Hoban says its perfectly OK as it counts as property under current SIPP investment rules and its all perfectly OK with him. In fact, he might recently have received such a fax.........................

Vince CAble is concerned, but Hoban obviously isn't, so that's all right then, and when the FOS come around & with a FSCS bill with your name on the top of it in their hands, the fact that you warned them before it all happened doesn't exempt you from paying them a big cheque to compensate the poor fools who believed in the dream. SEEMples. Hope this helps.

Anitaki Uhuru Mbabane of Massamburah