Is this pedantic and is there any point?
Taken on a client recently from another firm. It's only a small concern in any case.
However, the previous adviser appears to have claimed AIA on items introduced (per their schedule provided) on 06/04/2005... the majority of which are labelled "building works" (for a garage used to store Stock I believe).
Obviously this isn't correct. The client says the works and assets noted were indeed bought some time ago.
No tax is at stake as a loss was made (and not relieved). Just seems a bit silly and gives me discomfort over the other figures/affairs.
Should I bother making an issue of it?
- client threatening legal action 1,768 24
- Twenty signs your practice is bad at tax 655 8
- Partially exempt? 233 9
- Reclaiming EU VAT on fuel and expenses 79 1
- First VAT Visit for client 204 4
- Dividend in specie 221 7
- VAT on imports and the Flat Rate Scheme for VAT 153 8
- Lorry Drivers 129 2
- Redundancy payment added to p45 56 1
- Partnership registered in error. No activities with view to profit. 77 1
- Mexican student in UK 111 2
- PI insurance for Auto Enrolment 190 3
- Accounting Practice acting as an employment agency 289 12
- payroll software 97 1
- No Tax Returns submitted for last 16 years 1,045 25
- Complicated Company car purchase 89 1
- Pricing 328 10
- Late VAT registration penalty 245 5
- VAT 115 2
- QuickBooks, Xero, FreeAgent and ClearBooks 848 18
- Skandia using wrong address 481
- Does anyone use PS Financials accounting software out there? 276
- FHL, period of grace and Entrepreneur's relief 271
- Employee rewards 256
- Legislation access for part-time sole practitioner? 218
- Rental Property W&T And Equipment 215
- EPS Analysis - Change to EURO 211
- Gift of reversion and lease into trust by two different people - later PPR 202
- Etax Australian 169
- Annual Management Charge Rebates and Self Assessment Tax Return 157