Share this content

Who invented quarterly updates and the £10k limit

Wouldn't it be nice to know how the quarterly updates and £10k limit came about.

Didn't find your answer?

Surely someone or a committee within Government or HMRC must have come up with the idea in MTD of quarterly updates and a threshold above £10k as the starting point.

Replies (13)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
By David Ex
04th Nov 2021 16:05

Not sure but I think I saw a short thread on the subject here recently.

EDIT: More than one apparently:

https://www.accountingweb.co.uk/any-answers/who-believes-quarterly-updat...

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Tax Dragon
04th Nov 2021 16:21

Not necessarily. Could be that the original drafter put [**£10,000**] in the script, thinking it would get replaced with the real figure once that was decided, then no-one thought to decide what the number should be and we are left with the number but not the "to be amended" brackets and asterisks.

It's clearly not a number that has been given any thought.

Thanks (0)
Tornado
By Tornado
04th Nov 2021 17:20

WHO INVENTED QUARTERLY UPDATES AND THE £10k LIMIT?

I guess that this was at a group meeting where everybody hugged everyone else and they told each other how good they all were and how worthwhile this project was and if they all wished as hard as they possibly could, this project would work no matter how ridiculous it seemed.

And then they all rode back to their fantasy worlds on their Unicorns.

Thanks (4)
avatar
By Hugo Fair
04th Nov 2021 17:25

The most likely answer (although you'll never get confirmation or even a denial) is an anonymous SpAd - probably nominally with an Econometric background (and approx zero years of experience in the commercial world).

And, neither the threshold nor the frequency of updates could be accurately portrayed as an 'idea' (which presupposes some creative input based on assumptions and data that are hopefully tested).

It's my guess that to the originator of those two 'values' they were merely 'variables' within the model constructed to test the impact of differing scenarios.
And as we all know (witness the average TIIN) the model can be made to say anything you like if you tinker with some of the underlying assumptions (those that are hidden not overtly stated).
It certainly wouldn't be the first time if an 'indication' was mentioned as to the desired result *before* the model was tuned to deliver the required outputs.

Finally, you take what the modeller (who knows nothing about taxation in practice) finds is a 'suitable' value of variable ... probably apply a little rounding (in the cause of brevity/simplicity so beloved of the communications wing) ... and lo & behold two values are announced.
After that, the big chiefs, who avoid any changes as a potential sign of weakness, are committed to those values - come hell or high water.

Oh, brave new world ...

Thanks (2)
Replying to Hugo Fair:
avatar
By Tax Dragon
04th Nov 2021 17:32

I think that's what I said. But encoded.

Thanks (1)
Replying to Tax Dragon:
avatar
By Hugo Fair
04th Nov 2021 19:03

Slightly more of a process-flow schematic than an encoding exercise (and limited to flowery language in the absence of a facility here to incorporate diagrams) ... but, Yes, I cede the title to you for brevity and focus - not that there was ever any danger of it resting upon my tortured brow.

Thanks (1)
Replying to Hugo Fair:
Tornado
By Tornado
04th Nov 2021 17:42

Yes, exactly.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Hugo Fair:
avatar
By johnjenkins
05th Nov 2021 09:38

and there's me thinking someone was sitting on the bog and had an epiphany (and everybody else).

Thanks (0)
By ireallyshouldknowthisbut
05th Nov 2021 09:39

My guess would be lobbying from the big software co's who are the only net beneficiary from this daft system. I would not be surprised at all if they have some Owen Patterson's on board at HMRC' side with pockets full of bribes given the absurd responses to reasonable objections.

I more sensible limit would be based on transactional levels.

Under 10 a month and software is a complete joke.

So turnover + transactions would be more sensible albeit with hair splitting around consolidated transactions would no doubt ensue.....

Thanks (0)
Replying to ireallyshouldknowthisbut:
Tornado
By Tornado
05th Nov 2021 09:54

"Under 10 a month and software is a complete joke. "

That simply will not happen and HMRC do not have the resources (or probably the inclination) to enforce this.

Anyone involved with MTD at its Genesis will almost certainly have got well out of it by now, and if there were any sweeteners from the Software Companies, they will have all been consumed and digested by now.

In the meantime, the Software Companies will have been signing up tens of thousands of subscribers, with each new subscription adding ten times the annual fee value to the value of their Company, and they will now be looking for the most opportune moment to sell out to the highest bidders, even if that does happen to be the Chinese or Russians. Left in the debris will be tens of thousands of subscribers who still do not understand the difference between Capital and Revenue.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Tornado:
By ireallyshouldknowthisbut
05th Nov 2021 10:41

This is who HMRC are really after, not real sole traders, but disguised employees.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/nov/05/gig-working-in-england-...

For those people (I don't act for this type of client I imagine they DIY) suddenly the whole do it digital, pay quarterly thing make sense given they are transient low paid jobs, dressed up as 'self employed'

For 'real' self employed who have a proper businesses, its nonsense.

As ever they need to tackle the root cause - fake self employment - not the symptom.

Thanks (0)
Replying to ireallyshouldknowthisbut:
avatar
By johnjenkins
05th Nov 2021 13:03

No such thing as "fake self-employed" or "disguised employees". It's up to the market not HMRC to decide employment status. HMRC trying to control employment status is why they are in such a mess. The irony of IR35 stopping them completing MTD is priceless.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By AdamMurphy
05th Nov 2021 10:09

Baldrick must be in their family tree

Thanks (0)
Share this content