.

Free advice on AWeb

Didn't find your answer?

 .

Replies (30)

Comments for this post are now closed.

Logo
By marks
11th Jun 2018 22:09

It's a free world so dont think you can force someone to have an accountant.

If they want to do it themselves then thats their choice. Most people who do a tax return do it themselves rather than have an advisor doing it for them.

Though would alway say that it is worth the investment of getting an accountant on board from the start as they can often save the business more than the cost of their fee through; ensuring penalties are avoided, tax planning and business advice and support.

Thanks (0)
Replying to marks:
RLI
By lionofludesch
12th Jun 2018 08:39

marks wrote:

It's a free world so dont think you can force someone to have an accountant.

It's not a free world and the Government frequently makes us do things we don't want to do.

MTD is a topical example but there are hundreds of others.

Thanks (1)
avatar
By Matrix
11th Jun 2018 22:41

I agree with Mark that plenty of people file their tax returns themselves.

It is so easy to set up a company that many business owners fancy being company directors without checking their business model allows for the approx £1k compliance cost of doing things properly. Obviously the cost of getting it wrong could be much higher.

Thanks (0)
By Tim Vane
11th Jun 2018 23:57

Luckily even the professional bodies aren't dumb enough to think that is anything other than a ridiculous idea. But if we really want to stifle business why stop there? Every business, big or small, should be forced to appoint an accountant, a health and safety officer, a money laundering officer, a data protection officer, a lawyer, a medical officer, a safeguarding officer, and finally a compliance officer to ensure that all the others are doing their jobs properly. If there's enough money left over then it might be possible to employ somebody to actually do the work, whatever that may be.

Thanks (8)
Replying to Tim Vane:
avatar
By David Winch
15th Jun 2018 11:27

And employ the services of a professional Marketing Consultant too!

David Winch
Sales & Marketing Consultant
Cambridge

Thanks (2)
By SteveHa
15th Jun 2018 15:28

So would a firm of chartered accountants be required to engage a separate accountant in this nanny state that you propose?

Thanks (3)
Teignmouth
By Paul Scholes
12th Jun 2018 10:08

"Do you feel making Companies House and HMRC more accessible makes this a growing issue? "

It's the above, the availability of free information on everything and cloud technology, designed for the user not the accountant, that has enabled businesses to do what had previously been seen as specialist work that only accountants could understand.

Through fear and self interest, some accountants have been guilty of prolonging the mystery of their secret arts to their captive clients, who knew no better but, thankfully, this is fast disappearing.

Even 3-4 years ago a survey showed that over 30% of SMEs did not have an accountant and of those I've met they (usually millennials) are perfectly capable of doing the routine stuff every year and would access sites like this for stuff they didn't know or pay for more in depth advice.

Whilst you say you want to ignore the question of CCAB, your question uses the word "qualified". How would legislation define "qualified"?

I feel I should have ignored this question, my only hope that this is perhaps for academia rather than a serious real world proposition.

Thanks (1)
avatar
By bernard michael
12th Jun 2018 10:19

There aren't enough accountants to go round

Thanks (1)
paddle steamer
By DJKL
12th Jun 2018 10:30

Who gets the Del Boys? The consequence of such a decision is that some poor *** has to deal with all the crooks/wasters etc

Obviously under this new regime accountants will be forced to take all clients, no cherry picking, one cannot have a non inclusive society where someone is denied their legal right to "qualified" accounting representation, universal cover under the NAS (National Accounting Service)

Still, one could always simply get a fair few of them into the fold by reintroducing audits for all companies (and no relying on assurances from directors this time, audit means audit not merely going through the motions-good luck with completeness).

I see this as a total win win, all waste of space , dodgy, company looting limited company owners (ever notice that about 95% of "those" questions are re companies) would devolve onto the CCAB qualified accountants.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By hiu612
15th Jun 2018 09:58

I've often thought that a better idea would be to have a mandatory level of awareness (some form of training and qualification) in order to be able to be appointed / continue to act as a company director. So that those forming companies and taking on directorships go into it with at least a basic understanding of the corporate / individual distinction, and their basic rights and responsibilities. Nothing's going to be a perfect answer, but it does seem odd that any old Larry can form and run a limited company without the least bit of understanding of what's involved.

Thanks (1)
avatar
By David Gordon FCCA
15th Jun 2018 10:17

Don't be daft.

Thanks (2)
avatar
By lh3f9764bg1g
15th Jun 2018 10:32

Of course . . . . if you wanted to do them over PROPERLY you could force them to go to the big four for their representation. It just might be the case that some people/companies would be better off representing themselves (or, rather, society would be better off if they represented themselves rather than go to those-who-have-to-suffer-the-big-fines but who can afford them because the penalties are always less than the rewards).

Thanks (0)
avatar
By pauljohnston
15th Jun 2018 10:47

Not happy with this suggestion but I do feel that anyone who holds themselves out to be an accountant should only be allowed to do so when he or she can show that they have a level of competence.

Thanks (1)
Replying to pauljohnston:
avatar
By lh3f9764bg1g
15th Jun 2018 11:54

Like the Big Four? That sort of level of competence?

Thanks (3)
avatar
By dmmarler
15th Jun 2018 11:13

I think it would be a good idea if everyone who started to run a business (yet alone a company) had some basic training BEFORE they started to trade. Perhaps if a new business were required to register with HMRC (or whomsoever) before trading and, if they did not have a basic business qualification, undertake a week's training to cover contracts, bookkeeping, insurance and general compliance. (Online training should be out - far too easy to cheat!) Then we might get some clients with a basic understanding of what they are supposed to do.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Michael C Feltham
15th Jun 2018 13:46

"However should CCAB and others be asking the government to look at this? ".

CCAB member bodies (ICAS) particularly, years ago tried to persuade Government, that all non-quals be banned; and only members of bodies supervised by CCAB ought to be in practise.

Breach of European Human Rights act- denying people the right to earn a living.

I, in fact, set-up an independent supervisory body (an alternative to CCAB) which held its inaugural meeting in the HQ of the FRC, thanks to the kindness and support of the then Secretary, Chris Wobshall.

Waste of time!

My plan was to screen ALL bodies members, in practice, to ensure a minimum level of competence: i.e. Level One; Self Employed; Level Two: Company Accounts and so on. Similar to the demands of then law applying to those selling Life Assurance, Pensions et al.

No pass: No practising!

People who had been selling Life Assurance and associated products for many years, had been compelled to qualify.

Quite right to.

Government faced a dilemma: the mounting pressure from CCAB member bodies and the hot reaction from non-quals.

My solution would have ensured, at least, a minimum standard of professional ability and knowledge.

It must be accepted, non-quals, even where and when members of non-CCAB accountancy bodies (Such as time-barred students who have worked in a practice for years) enjoy significant vocational merit.

DTI and Government gave up and turned a blind eye.

As always...

Thanks (1)
avatar
By bernard michael
15th Jun 2018 15:00

If the level of professional competence is set at that shown by PWC in auditing Carillion, a 3 year old child would be able to advise

How low do you want to set the bar and who should be the arbiter

Thanks (0)
avatar
By lh3f9764bg1g
15th Jun 2018 15:04

I wonder how many of these "non-quals" have suffered multi-million £ fines on multiple occasions?
I suppose that, just so long as the fines aren't in excess of the consultancy fees then all is well with the world.
Except, perhaps, for the shareholders, the State, the workers, the sub-contractors, the suppliers etc., etc..

Thanks (0)
Morph
By kevinringer
15th Jun 2018 15:35

I don't think it should be compulsory to engage an accountant but I do feel the term 'accountant' should be protected in the same was solicitor or barrister is.

Thanks (2)
Replying to kevinringer:
avatar
By Michael C Feltham
15th Jun 2018 17:33

Agreed.

However, it is up to Government to enact legislation: which thus far (for 25 years!) they have been unwilling to do!

Thanks (1)
Replying to Michael C Feltham:
paddle steamer
By DJKL
15th Jun 2018 18:35

I just need them to desist from regulating me a bit longer so that I can continue to give non qualified advice to clients for a maximum of eight more years (likely fewer) and frankly then I will not care.

I have no problem with regulation / proving competence providing it is a level playing field, that means no byes for all the CCAB qualifieds, they can sit the new tests with the rest of us and pass or fail on what they currently know not what they touched on 20 years ago in an exam and have never seen/updated since.

Lets see how well they all do, some will be fine, I suspect quite a large percentage, but based on my experience and reinforced by some of the questions posed on here some CCAB accountants are in for a nasty shock (possibly say up to 20% of them), especially those lurching back to practice with somewhat limited experience in the first place.

What do I base my forecast upon you may ask, well part of my day job is checking company accounts for prospective tenants wishing to lease premises from my employer, it is amazing the errors/mistakes arising from both unqualified and qualified firms, it seems a few have really not got to grips with FRS102 etc.

Caveat emptor

Thanks (1)
Replying to DJKL:
avatar
By Michael C Feltham
15th Jun 2018 19:35

@djkl

Quite agree.

Most Chartered and Chartered Certified study arcane and complex topics which they will never ever use in practise!

Furthermore, a vast majority of UK practitioners are sole or perhaps, two or three partner firms.

My wife finished her City career, working for the ICAEW at Head Office in Moregate: mainly working on meetings for small the practitioner's committee.

A leading light and indeed, chair of the Small Practitioner's Committee was one Mark Spofforth: then they recruited him to the main council: overnight he changed!

CCAB reps from such as ICAEW tend to be seconded from the top ten...

No wonder then, they are totally disinterested in the SME sector: which, of course, represents nearly 50% of UK enterprises. A majority being small. A majority of that majority are sole traders.

Government, however, always fly to CCAB and Top Ten practices for "Advice" and forward policy planning!

When circa 80% of constituents of the FT 100 are foreign and tend to use US recognised CPAs it is then no wonder that the real economy on Main Street is in such a mess; and is dumped on in terms of regulatory nonsense.

And are punished for daring to try and earn a living!

And Theresa The Appeaser Cotton Bud May (or May not, depending upon the party political climate at the time) et al, believe Britain can become a creative and tech innovative globally leading economic powerhouse!

ALL major tech giants (Apple; Microsoft; Cisco; Dell; Intel; Hewlett Packard etc) started as SMEs.

And grew.

In her dreams...

Thanks (1)
Runagood - the business growth AI software system for accountants
By Runagood
16th Jun 2018 11:02

Yes make it mandatory to serve the original intention of enabling creditors and prospective creditors to ascertain their exposure to a limited liability entity. All the so called red tape removal has achieved is an explosion in costly credit referencing agencies and dodgy dealings made easier.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Runagood:
paddle steamer
By DJKL
16th Jun 2018 12:04

Are you advocating the return of audits rather than mere accounts preparation by a select panel?

If that is to be the case large tranches of business entities stop incorporating, we go back to the 1980s early 1990s when a smaller firm would have vastly more sole traders and partnerships than limited companies within the client list.

Without access to firm records of the very late 80s early 90s I suspect we had up to 400 clients in total with maybe up to 80 companies (all audited) within that population.

Thanks (0)
By Tim Vane
16th Jun 2018 19:10

I cannot understand why AWeb still allows [***] to remove their original questions.

The original question was:

-------------------------------------

Should every business have a qualified accountant

Free advice on AWeb

I have noticed that in the last few months, almost every day there is a question from a business owner who seems to want free advice rather than pay an accountant. It may be that they think they can do the accounts and tax themselves or may have started a new business and are waiting to get an accountant when the accounts are due or are looking for free advice rather than pay their accountant. Therefore should there be legislation requiring every business, sole trader, Partnership, Ltd company and LLP to have an appointed accountant in practice right at the start?

Do you feel making Companies House and HMRC more accessible makes this a growing issue?

I will leave the issue regarding whether the accountant should be a member of CCAB etc as its been asked before.

However should CCAB and others be asking the government to look at this?

Thanks (2)
Replying to Tim Vane:
Morph
By kevinringer
18th Jun 2018 14:24

I've reported the original poster. Thanks Tim for posting a copy of the question.

Thanks (0)
Lone Wolf
By Lone_Wolf
18th Jun 2018 14:54

Another edited OP. To the gallows with this man!

Thanks (0)
Replying to Lone_Wolf:
paddle steamer
By DJKL
18th Jun 2018 15:07

The dreaded black spot in a figurative and literal sense.

Thanks (0)
Replying to DJKL:
RLI
By lionofludesch
18th Jun 2018 15:14

Literal or literary ?

Thanks (0)
Replying to lionofludesch:
paddle steamer
By DJKL
18th Jun 2018 15:24

I suppose both, it is up there on the top of the thread plus of course handed out to Billy Bones and Long John as indicators of having been found guilty by their brethren.

Thanks (0)