Goods Purchased for Rental

Goods Purchased for Rental

Didn't find your answer?

I have a new customer whose business is renting domestic goods. Their previous bookkeeper has set up the accounting system (Quick Books) so the cost of all items purchased is added to stock value in the balance sheet and the balancing entries being creditors and purchase VAT. 

When an item is rented the stock value in the balance sheet is reduced. The stock is rented not sold. The cost of these purchases never hits the P & L.

I have dealt with rentals before for the party who is renting. Never for the owner of goods renting to another party.

Has anyone had experience of this situation? Your advice would be appreciated.

Replies (32)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

By petersaxton
25th Oct 2014 13:40

Fixed assets

Aren't the goods fixed assets?

Thanks (1)
avatar
By tonyh
25th Oct 2014 14:28

Agree Peter

I would treat them as fixed assets and revalue annually,

If you are a book-keeper the hire charge is simply Income the double entry.bank/cash .

Thanks (0)
Replying to SteveHa:
avatar
By mackthefork
25th Oct 2014 16:18

i would have thought

tonyh wrote:

I would treat them as fixed assets and revalue annually,

If you are a book-keeper the hire charge is simply Income the double entry.bank/cash .

That if the business is the rental of goods that the items rented are trading stock.  Happy to be proved wrong though.

MtF

Thanks (0)
Replying to SteveHa:
avatar
By MaureenW
30th Oct 2014 12:13

Not sure what you mean by "

Not sure what you mean by " If you are a book-keeper the hire charge is simply Income the double entry.bank/cash ." If I wasn't a bookkeeper would the accounting be different. 

Thanks (0)
avatar
By buttinski
25th Oct 2014 16:14

How were they bought?

At the moment you say the cost is in stock with the other side being creditors and purchase VAT.

This does not make sense, so it needs looking at.

Your current situation suggests that the 'stock' has not been paid for yet, and that the bookkeeping is wrong.

The cost of the domestic goods (net of VAT) should be debited to fixed assets, the input tax should be debited to a VAT account, and the gross invoice value (goods + VAT) should be credited to creditors.

When the supplier of the 'stock' is paid the entry is debit creditors, and credit bank account.

It is also uncertain from your post whether you are operating a 'cash' system or a 'credit' system. The fact that you are using a creditors account suggests that you have a credit system.

You need to ensure that you do not mix systems. 

Thanks (0)
Replying to LSC London:
avatar
By buttinski
30th Oct 2014 12:28

Sorry but

They are not stock - they are fixed assets.

The posting of 'debit stock' & 'credit creditors' is not correct.

Thanks (0)
Replying to lionofludesch:
avatar
By buttinski
30th Oct 2014 12:30

Sorry again

My previous post 'crossed'.

Hopefully you now realise that the bookkeeping is wrong.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Tom 7000:
Red Leader
By Red Leader
30th Oct 2014 16:47

straightforward

They are fixed assets.

Assuming that the goods are rented out without somebody to operate the equipment, then they are only eligible for writing down allowances.

I'd love to see the tax computations that have been done!

EDIT: but see Portia's correcting post below.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Tom 7000:
avatar
By MaureenW
30th Oct 2014 13:34

Tax Comps

Red Leader wrote:

They are fixed assets.

Assuming that the goods are rented out without somebody to operate the equipment, then they are only eligible for writing down allowances.

I'd love to see the tax computations that have been done!

Me  too. I have looked at the accounts filed at Companies House. They are only abbreviated. However the fixed assets consist of Computers, Motor vehicle, and Office furniture and fittings. The current assets contain a valuation for stock which is very low. 

 

Thanks (0)
Replying to Tom 7000:
Portia profile image
By Portia Nina Levin
30th Oct 2014 13:39

No!

Red Leader wrote:

Assuming that the goods are rented out without somebody to operate the equipment, then they are only eligible for writing down allowances.

They are eligible for AIA. It is only FYAs that you cannot claim on assets held for leasing.

Thanks (2)
Replying to bobsto12:
Red Leader
By Red Leader
30th Oct 2014 16:48

thank you

Portia Nina Levin wrote:

Red Leader wrote:

Assuming that the goods are rented out without somebody to operate the equipment, then they are only eligible for writing down allowances.

They are eligible for AIA. It is only FYAs that you cannot claim on assets held for leasing.

Yes, I forgot that.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By DMGbus
25th Oct 2014 17:30

Fixed Assets

I have dealt with accounts were equipment is bought then rented out.

Case one = fork lift trucks.

Case two = televisions and video recorders.

In both clients' cases capitalised as fixed assets.

Being fixed assets capital allowances were claimed.

Thanks (0)
The triggle is a distant cousin of the squonk (pictured)
By Triggle
30th Oct 2014 12:20

They are fixed asets not stock.

See http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/bimmanual/bim33040.htm

Thanks (2)
By petersaxton
30th Oct 2014 12:25

Ask the accountant

I think you have enough confirmation that the accounting is wrong so you can ask the accountant.

Some accountants just prepare accounts as quickly as possible to get their fees. Obviously I'm not saying this accountant does that but it's possible.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By MaureenW
30th Oct 2014 12:26

Thanks

Thank you everyone for your replies. I may have a bit of a can of worms to deal with here. This system, as I said in a previous post has been running for 8 years. The accountants have never queried it. The previous bookkeeper is very much revered and suggesting that she may have got it wrong would be tantamount to sacrilege. 

I am going to have to think carefully about how I deal with this

Thanks (0)
Replying to leshoward:
avatar
By buttinski
30th Oct 2014 12:39

The answer

is in your first post.

You speak with the accountants and say that you do not understand why the system has been the way it was, because your understanding is that the equipment should be treated as fixed assets, not stock.

The ball is then in their court to explain why it is the way it is/why you are wrong.

The longer you leave it, the more difficult it will become.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By MaureenW
30th Oct 2014 12:49

Another Q same subject

So we have established that these purchases are in fact fixed assets.

Am I right in thinking that the postings to the P & L will be 
a) depreciation 

b) revaluation when the goods come back and have been Inspected.

DMGbus. Did you claim Capital allowances on the fork lifts and  TV's.

 

 

 

Thanks (0)
Replying to Tom 7000:
avatar
By buttinski
30th Oct 2014 13:02

Accounting policies

You are into accounting policy treatment - so should be directed by the accountants.

But 'yes' depreciation is charged to P&L,

Any further diminution in value should be measured, but how often is the question.  Unless you are preparing periodic management accounts (which I doubt) it should be done as at the accounting year end.

Under normal circumstances CAs will be claimed, but again this is the accountants' province.

 

Thanks (0)
Replying to Tax Dragon:
avatar
By MaureenW
30th Oct 2014 13:29

I am required to produce periodic management accounts.

 

Thanks (0)
Replying to paul.benny:
avatar
By buttinski
30th Oct 2014 13:35

Same answer

MaureenW wrote:

I am required to produce periodic management accounts.

 

Speak to the accountants.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By buttinski
30th Oct 2014 13:34

There is one further point

what the bookkeeper enters into QuickBooks isn't necessarily (is rarely?) what the accountant puts into the annual accounts!!

This thought occurs as I am putting together a set of accounts from QuickBooks where the bookkeeper doesn't worry too much whether her postings are to P&L accounts or BS accounts - she still balances.

Thanks (0)
Replying to The Dullard:
avatar
By MaureenW
30th Oct 2014 13:36

New Bookkeeper

buttinski wrote:

what the bookkeeper enters into QuickBooks isn't necessarily (is rarely?) what the accountant puts into the annual accounts!!

This thought occurs as I am putting together a set of accounts from QuickBooks where the bookkeeper doesn't worry too much whether her postings are to P&L accounts or BS accounts - she still balances.

They need a new Bookkeeper.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Red Leader:
avatar
By buttinski
30th Oct 2014 13:41

Other qualities

MaureenW wrote:

buttinski wrote:

what the bookkeeper enters into QuickBooks isn't necessarily (is rarely?) what the accountant puts into the annual accounts!!

This thought occurs as I am putting together a set of accounts from QuickBooks where the bookkeeper doesn't worry too much whether her postings are to P&L accounts or BS accounts - she still balances.

They need a new Bookkeeper.

We can cope with the bookkeeping imperfections as she is very good in all the other areas of her job.

Thanks (1)
Replying to Red Leader:
By petersaxton
30th Oct 2014 13:49

Are you?

MaureenW wrote:

buttinski wrote:

what the bookkeeper enters into QuickBooks isn't necessarily (is rarely?) what the accountant puts into the annual accounts!!

This thought occurs as I am putting together a set of accounts from QuickBooks where the bookkeeper doesn't worry too much whether her postings are to P&L accounts or BS accounts - she still balances.

They need a new Bookkeeper.

Are you angling for that job as well!? :-)

Thanks (0)
avatar
By DMGbus
30th Oct 2014 13:35

Capital allowances were certainly claimed in the case of the company hiring out Fork Lift Trucks.

Regarding the TV / video recorded rental company I didn't deal with the tax side for that client so can't say, but I can see no reason why capital allowances would not have been claimed.

Regarding the way forward:

The end-of-year tax accountants should deal with the Capital Allowances claims where appropriate and provide some guidance on the month by month depreciation amounts (ie. they should recommend an annual depreciation rate which divided by 12 can be journalled each month).

In the cases that I dealt with revaluation was not carried out since a reasonably accurate or adequate depreciation rate was used.   Goods coming back off hire in poor condition would have had one of the following options applied:

Sold at market value when coming off hireCompensation claimed off customer to whom the goods were hired if it was clear that damage had been caused by the customer

In the case of the TV/Video rental outfit the depreciation rate chosen was fairly high due to risks associated with techonlogical development of such consumer goods.

 

Thanks (1)
Portia profile image
By Portia Nina Levin
30th Oct 2014 13:44

Ignore [***] Kiss

Definite attitude problem!

Thanks (0)
Replying to atleastisoundknowledgable...:
avatar
By buttinski
30th Oct 2014 13:47

Please expand

Portia Nina Levin wrote:

Definite attitude problem!

On your comment.

I suspect that only you are brilliant at all aspects of your job.

Thanks (1)
Replying to JDBENJAMIN:
avatar
By buttinski
30th Oct 2014 14:16

No need to reply

buttinski wrote:

Portia Nina Levin wrote:

Definite attitude problem!

On your comment.

I suspect that only you are brilliant at all aspects of your job.

I have been drawn into these nonsensical exchanges before.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By morgani
31st Oct 2014 09:55

Not the only one

Sorry to hijack your thread but I have recently taken on a client from an accountant who passed away.  Literally started work properly on this yesterday.  Guess what... the same thing.

He purchases electrical goods for hire by customers.  These have been treated as purchases and any amounts he holds on his person (in his can or at his premises) has been treated as closing stock.

None of these have been treated as assets and I have no-body to go back to.  The wife of the previous accountant has simply passed on the working papers to each client and said sorry you need to find yourself a new accountant.  The working papers do not show any major adjustments in respect of these assets.

Now I can correct the current year and possibly re-state the previous year but how far do I realistically go back?

Thanks (0)
avatar
By MaureenW
31st Oct 2014 13:08

It is a quandry

I do bookkeeping and management accounts. As someone pointed out earlier often what appears in the statutory accounts is often different to what appears in the companies books and I understand the reasons for this. I see no evidence of the companies accountant having made an adjustment for what I see as a bookkeeping error. The accounts filed at companies house are abbreviated however there is no asset called "Goods Available for Rental" . I think that could only happen if their were no existing contracts and there was also a completely empty warehouse as at the year end. I have tried talking to the client however a I have said the previous bookkeeper is revered and one doesn't suggest that she may have made a mistake she is considered infallible. The MD has a mentor, unpaid, not an accountant, IT background. Who claims to have a lot of experience of dealing with systems for rental companies and is saying I am wrong and the many rental companies where she has implemented systems have all treated goods purchased for rental as stock. The company is changing accountants this year. They are a firm who know me and have referred business to me in the past, I don't want incorrect accounts that I have prepared going to them. I am in a quandary as how to proceed. 

Thanks (0)
Replying to JCresswellTax:
avatar
By buttinski
31st Oct 2014 13:31

How brave are you?

MaureenW wrote:

The MD has a mentor, unpaid, not an accountant, IT background. Who claims to have a lot of experience of dealing with systems for rental companies and is saying I am wrong and the many rental companies where she has implemented systems have all treated goods purchased for rental as stock.

Perhaps you should suggest that she is always wrong, so it doesn't really matter whether it was once or many times that she has implemented the system.

It does seem odd, though, that none of the external accountants have picked up on it.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By buttinski
31st Oct 2014 13:07

I suspect that

you have done as much as you can.

If you have a good relationship with the new accountants then discuss it with them once they have been appointed.

Thanks (2)