.

Registered for SA director but didn't receive any letter from HMRC in a month time

Didn't find your answer?

.

Replies (36)

Comments for this post are now closed.

avatar
By Wanderer
13th Jun 2018 09:19

Oh dear.

Why do you think that directors need to be registered as directors for SA?

Please do some research before you answer and please don't tell us that is what gov.uk or HMRC says.

You actions may have incurred wasted time / effort / fees for your friend.

Thanks (1)
Replying to Wanderer:
Gabriele
By Gabriele
14th Jun 2018 11:52

.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Gabriele:
avatar
By Wanderer
13th Jun 2018 10:14

Wanderer wrote:

....... and please don't tell us that is what gov.uk or HMRC says.

Gabriele wrote:

https://www.gov.uk/check-if-you-need-a-tax-return/y/director-of-a-company

Thanks (1)
Replying to Wanderer:
Gabriele
By Gabriele
14th Jun 2018 11:53

.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Gabriele:
avatar
By Wanderer
13th Jun 2018 10:17

Gabriele wrote:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/self-assessment-register-for-...

How did you decided that director do not need to be registered for SA?

Because many of us on here actually know what we are talking about and understand what the law says and what tribunal decisions have upheld and don't rely on the inaccuracies that are spouted by HMRC and published on .gov.uk.
Thanks (1)
Replying to Wanderer:
Gabriele
By Gabriele
14th Jun 2018 11:53

.

Thanks (0)
By SteveHa
13th Jun 2018 09:37

To take the edge of Wanderer's reply a little (though he is correct), unless the directors will have a tax liability other than on income taxed at source, there is no need for them to be within self-assessment.

If they are also shareholders and will receive dividends in excess of £2,000, then that's a different matter.

Thanks (0)
Replying to SteveHa:
avatar
By Wanderer
13th Jun 2018 09:47

Even then there's a good chance that the OP has brought the two directors within SA for 2017/2018 whereas there's a good chance that it would only be necessary for 2018/2019.

Of course we are now just guessing, hence my question why the OP thinks they need to be within SA.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By meadowsaw227
13th Jun 2018 10:47

For the little effort required in a directors sa tax return, presuming that their tax situation was such that they previously were not in the sa regime, I will always register them for sa immediately.
Makes me keep an eye on them through the year.
Belt and braces

Thanks (2)
Replying to meadowsaw227:
avatar
By Wanderer
13th Jun 2018 10:53

So you unnecessarily bring them into a system to 'make me keep an eye on them'.
Good luck with your PI insurers if there is ever a claim resulting from that.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Wanderer:
avatar
By meadowsaw227
13th Jun 2018 11:00

Bring it on, I love a challenge

Thanks (0)
Gabriele
By Gabriele
14th Jun 2018 11:54

.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Gabriele:
avatar
By Wanderer
13th Jun 2018 11:15

IF you used that link to the structured e-mail SA1 that you posted earlier, my experience is it used to be brilliant. Worked every time with no problems.

Unfortunately not so for the last year. My experience for 2017 often went along the lines of never hearing anything back and having to make multiple calls to the Agent Priority Line, having to make duplicate applications & having to send (multiple) copies by post.

Thanks (1)
Replying to Wanderer:
Gabriele
By Gabriele
14th Jun 2018 11:54

.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Gabriele:
avatar
By Wanderer
13th Jun 2018 12:01

No, that structured e-mail system doesn't give an acknowledgment reference number.

That, together with the fact that it now hardly ever works, is why we in the profession rarely use it now and go via our agents accounts where we do get a reference.

Perhaps you shouldn't be doing this private work and refer your friend to your employer?

Thanks (0)
Replying to Wanderer:
Gabriele
By Gabriele
14th Jun 2018 11:55

.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Gabriele:
avatar
By Wanderer
13th Jun 2018 12:28

Because possibly:-
1. You don't understand the requirements for registering for self assessment.
2. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.
3. You may have caused unnecessary issues for your friend.
4. It may be against your contract of employment.
5. Your employer may not be too happy with the situation.
6. You may need to register with HMRC under the money laundering regulations.
7. You are relying on the internet to guide you what to do.
8. If you are a trainee it may be against the requirements of your professional body.
9. You are potentially exposing yourself to claims which (I doubt) you have PI cover for.
10. You may be doing a general disservice to your friend.
etc etc.

Thanks (1)
Replying to Wanderer:
Gabriele
By Gabriele
14th Jun 2018 11:56

.

Thanks (1)
Replying to Gabriele:
avatar
By Wanderer
13th Jun 2018 13:07

Gabriele wrote:

Non of them :D because I helped to register for SA and asked a ONE question about it, you made it 'an elephant'.

And who said I will trust what you have said? I am here Only to read the opinions, but not to Work from opinions.

How you could say something like this if you don't know even a little? Honestly don't be SO arrogant, I am sure you are the same as everyone else and started from the Bottom.
Haven't been born an Auditor? Haven't you??????

Problem is that there's a high chance that you don't actually understand where you may have gone wrong. We haven't even started to cover whether it was necessary to register for CT which you also did.

And now you are posting this little tirade when above I've answered your original question, pointed out problems, given you a link where you can look up the law for yourself, given you practical, real life, experience about what works & what doesn't with SA registration and then pointed out potential further pitfalls, in response to a question you specifically asked!

No don't bother taking any of my advice, nor trust what I've said nor even reflect on the above. Go back to gov.uk and other parts of the internet & take all the advice from there.

What could possibly go wrong?

Thanks (0)
Replying to Wanderer:
Gabriele
By Gabriele
14th Jun 2018 11:57

.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Gabriele:
avatar
By Wanderer
13th Jun 2018 13:27

Gabriele wrote:

So you say, everything in HMRC website is incorrect?

No I didn't say that.
Gabriele wrote:

And CT (which again says that you need to register CT within 3 moths after the company incorporation) is incorrect as well???

Great example! Yes that's incorrect as well.
Thanks (0)
Replying to Gabriele:
avatar
By legerman
13th Jun 2018 15:19

Gabriele wrote:

So you say, everything in HMRC website is incorrect? And CT (which again says that you need to register CT within 3 months after the company incorporation) is incorrect as well???<

Where did you read that? Even gov uk hasn't got that wrong. They say:

"You’ll need to register for Corporation Tax within 3 months of starting to do business"

Do you recognise the difference?

Thanks (0)
Replying to Gabriele:
ALISK
By atleastisoundknowledgable...
13th Jun 2018 18:27

Gabriele wrote:

So you say, everything in HMRC website is incorrect?

Not everything, but you’d be surprised. The content says (generally) what HMRC want the law to be, not what it is.

Gabriele wrote:

And CT (which again says that you need to register CT within 3 moths after the company incorporation) is incorrect as well???


Bingo Wanderer. Gabriele - you couldn’t have picked a better second sentence if you tried.
Thanks (0)
avatar
By justsotax
13th Jun 2018 13:54

the most dangerous type knowledge....'not knowing what you don't know'

You appear to be exhibiting this....take some of the advice given on the chin.... it is given as much to protect you as it is the people you are advising.

Thanks (0)
By Tim Vane
13th Jun 2018 15:00

Nobody seems to be sticking up for the OP here. It's not a problem if she's not registered for MLR since it's just her friend and she is not charging him for any work. She isn't breaching the rules of her professional body because it's just helping out a friend, and if she continues to make mistakes and possibly ends up causing the friend even more cost and headaches then it's fine because it's just her friend and friends are happy to forgive things like that. For the same reason she doesn't need PI cover because her friend is entirely aware that she is not offering any advice on a professional level - it's just mates helping out mates. Her employers cannot have an issue with her helping a mate. In fact, given that sorting out future mistakes could be costly it may even benefit her employers if she eventually passes the mess on to them to deal with - could be a nice sign-up commission for her. The important thing is that this is just a friend and so everything will be fine.

Thanks (1)
Replying to Tim Vane:
Gabriele
By Gabriele
14th Jun 2018 12:06

.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Gabriele:
avatar
By Wanderer
14th Jun 2018 11:30

Gabriele wrote:

Thank you, this was very useful information. I don't do any extra paid work, but will read the requirements just to know for the future.

You've missed the irony in Tim's post.
"irony
noun
the expression of one's meaning by using language that normally signifies the opposite, typically for humorous or emphatic effect."
Thanks (0)
Replying to Wanderer:
avatar
By User deleted
14th Jun 2018 11:40

I once bought an irony machine.

It did everything apart from be ironic.

Thanks (1)
By Paul D Utherone
14th Jun 2018 12:58

All gone now :(

Thanks (0)
Replying to Paul D Utherone:
By SteveHa
14th Jun 2018 13:43

I'm sure Tim's eidetic computer will be along to fill in the blanks.

Thanks (0)
Lone Wolf
By Lone_Wolf
14th Jun 2018 14:13

Surely a permanent ban is in order for posters like this. It just fills the site up with crap.

Whilst I can't be certain given it has been edited, it seems the OP has messed up, has been in over their head, and then decided to throw the toys out of the pram when presented with the correct answer.

Suck it up and accept it rather than trying to cover up you failings.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Lone_Wolf:
avatar
By Accountant A
14th Jun 2018 15:35

Quote:

Surely a permanent ban is in order for posters like this.

Should but won't. They all contribute to the stats Sift report to their advertisers.

Quote:

Whilst I can't be certain given it has been edited, it seems the OP has messed up, has been in over their head, and then decided to throw the toys out of the pram when presented with the correct answer.

Correct

Quote:

Suck it up and accept it rather than trying to cover up you failings.

Some people can't handle the truth ....

Thanks (0)
By Tim Vane
14th Jun 2018 15:46

Here is the original question:

SA Director's registration

Registered for SA director but didn't receive any letter from HMRC in a month time

Hi all :)

This is my first question here and I really hope so this website will be very helpful for me.

I am helping my friend with his company's paperwork. He did incorporate it in February and asked for my help in beginning of May, so I did the first steps: registered him for CT and did SA Director's registrations (2 directors) privatelly through Gov.uk website on 13th of May, on the end of registration I saw a summary and saved it before submitted, but after I have pressed Submit, it didn't show me confirmation or aknowledgement reference number (both times), as I never done it before I thought it is all correct, but now after a month they didn't receive any letter from HMRC saying they are registered as directors for SA. Could it be something wrong? Or should we just call to HMRC and ask them if they received applications for SA directors registrations?

Kind regards for all the answers

Thanks (1)
Replying to Tim Vane:
avatar
By Wanderer
14th Jun 2018 16:44

Wish I was as clever as Tim!

Thanks (0)
Richard Hattersley
By Richard Hattersley
15th Jun 2018 15:36

Since the Op has removed their question I think that's a good reason to close this thread. Thanks all who participated but I think it's run its course.

Thanks (0)