Share this content
5

OUTPUT VAT - CIS SUBCONTRACTOR

Didn't find your answer?

Hi,

Seeking some clarity please.

Onboarded a new client: Stonemasons, VAT registered, mix of customers, (private clients and 3 contractors).

Client is a registered CIS sub-contractor who is not yet entitled to apply for Gross status. They currently have 20% deductions made for all their sub-contracting work. The previous provider has been inconsistent in their treatment of the CIS deductions for the client's quarterly VAT return.

Using an example of a gross sales invoice for £1,200 (VAT @ £200). 

Treatment 1: Account for VAT using the Invoice basis. Cash received by client @ £1,000 (after 20% CIS deduction). Box 1 = £200. Box 6 = £1,000. Client has taken a £200 'hit'.

Treatment 2: Account for VAT using the Cash basis. Cash received by client @ £1,000 (after 20% CIS deduction). Box 1 = £166.67 (20% @ £1,000). Box 6 = £833.33. HMRC has taken a 'hit' (should have received £200 output VAT, only received £166.67).

The client's turnover is within the Cash Accounting Scheme limit and has always been so. 

Any thoughts greatly appreciated.

 

 

Replies (5)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

RLI
By lionofludesch
13th Feb 2020 16:54

Utter rubbish, I'm afraid. The tax he's had deducted is still treated as received by him and he needs to included the whole £200 on his VAT return.

Thanks (2)
avatar
By GW
13th Feb 2020 17:04

I agree with Lion

You need to think of the transaction as though he received £1,200 and then paid £200 tax to HMRC. - In reality the contractor made the £200 payment on your client's behalf.
From the contractor's point of view the invoice is paid in full
From HMRC's point of view £200 has been paid towards tax liabilities

Thanks (1)
avatar
By SXGuy
13th Feb 2020 17:12

I agree. Utter tosh. Total value treated as received.

Thanks (1)
avatar
By bettybobbymeggie
13th Feb 2020 18:52

Blimey, and I thought I was rubbish.

Thanks (2)
Replying to bettybobbymeggie:
avatar
By EASTIE
13th Feb 2020 20:07

That made me laugh. Previous providers are a mid-sized firm of accountants. I struggled to see their rationale, thank you!

Thanks (0)
Share this content