Save content
Have you found this content useful? Use the button above to save it to your profile.
pencil with no point | accountingweb | Tax year basis: What is it good for?
iStock_jttrey3_pointless

Tax year basis: What is it good for?

by

The introduction of the tax year basis in 2024/25, with the transition in 2023/24, is going to create a lot of extra work and costs. Rebecca Cave wonders if it has a point.

1st Jun 2023
Save content
Have you found this content useful? Use the button above to save it to your profile.

I am old enough to remember when the assessment of self-employed profits switched from the preceding year basis (results from accounting period ending in the previous tax year) to the current year basis (results from accounting period ending in the current tax year).

This change was a genuine simplification to help taxpayers calculate their own tax liabilities based on the profits from their most recent set of accounts and it was brought about to facilitate the introduction of self assessment in 1996/97. 

In the transitional year, the profits of two accounting periods were averaged to produce the amount to be assessed in 1996/97, so effectively half of the profits escaped tax. HMRC seemed happy with this compromise at the time, although there were some anti-avoidance rules to discourage profit manipulation. 

Switch again

Contrast this to the introduction of the tax year basis in 2024/25, with the transition in 2023/24. This affects sole traders and partnerships that do not use a fiscal accounting period, in other words accounts prepared to a day between 31 March to 5 April inclusive. 

There is now huge pressure from HMRC to move all unincorporated businesses onto a fiscal accounting period. If an unincorporated business doesn’t change its year end it will have to apportion figures from two sets of accounts in order to complete the annual tax return. 

Those with accounting periods ending late in the tax year may have to estimate the results from the second accounting period, as there won’t be time to finalise the later set of accounts. Dealing with those estimated figures will create uncertainty, unnecessary costs and potential penalties.

No escape

Unlike in 1996/97, HMRC is not permitting any profits to escape assessment in the transition to the tax year basis. 

Businesses will have to calculate their profits or losses for two periods to report on the 2023/24 tax return:

  • Period A: 12 months to the previously used accounting date
  • Period B: From end of period A to 5 April 2024. 

If the business decides to switch to a fiscal accounting year in 2023/24, the profits/losses for A and B are apportioned from the inevitably long accounting period to 5 April/31 March, calculated on a day basis. 

If the business does not change its accounting year end it will have to apportion profits for period B from the second accounting period that partly falls in 2023/24. There is also the possibility to change the accounting period in 2022/23, and determining the right time to change requires a whole separate set of calculations and forecasts. 

Spreading the pain

The net period B profits, after deduction of overlap relief, will be assessed in equal parts over five years beginning in 2023/24. However, the taxpayer will be able to elect to allocate more profit to earlier tax years during this five-year period. This is another election that will require multiple “what if” calculations. 

The implications for dealing with losses that arise in 2023/24 is mind-bogglingly complicated. Different rules apply to losses arising in period A and in period B. I recommend reading the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales (ICAEW) Tax Faculty Tax Guide 02/22: Basis Period Reform for further information.

History of a bad idea

The switch to the tax year basis was introduced into the Making Tax Digital for income tax self assessment (MTD ITSA) proposals quite late in the day. 

It was only in July 2021 (five years after the initial MTD consultation papers) when HMRC suddenly realised that taxpayers who had several trades or property businesses would need to file MTD reports for many different quarterly periods in the tax year, leading to up to 13 MTD filings per year. It thus pushed for a reform of basis periods from April 2022.

Due to another delay in the commencement of MTD ITSA, the reform of basis periods was pushed back from 2022/23 to April 2024. When MTD ITSA was postponed for a fifth time to April 2026 (later for partnerships) the switch to the tax year basis was inexplicably kept at the proposed timetable of 2024/25. 

Where’s the benefit?

To be clear: there is no benefit for taxpayers in moving to the tax year basis. It is not a simplification, but quite the opposite. 

The only reason HMRC can give is that the tax year basis is essential to the smooth running of MTD, meaning the quarterly updates and tax liabilities reflected back to the taxpayer. I have questioned the need for quarterly updates for years, and now even ICAEW is pushing HMRC to drop quarterly reporting

Those small businesses that find using an accounting period that is not aligned to the fiscal year confusing, have already switched to 5 April or 31 March year end. Businesses that haven’t switched to a fiscal accounting period generally have a good reason not to. Perhaps they have a seasonal business where a spring year end would be very inconvenient or are part of an international partnership that uses a calendar year end. 

The change is going to create a lot of work and hence extra costs to calculate the assessable profits for 20223/24 and the following five years. For businesses that don’t change their accounting year end the costs will be on-going to the cessation of the business. 

To answer my question – what is it good for? Absolutely nothing.

Replies (56)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
By GHarr497688
01st Jun 2023 16:23

First to reply: I do not believe HMRC want to work with Accountants any longer to get a fair tax system. My belief is that all the good Accountants will get out of the Profession leaving larger Accountants and Cowboys to do tick box exercises. I will be leaving the Profession in a few months and with how HMRC is run I will never be returning. I mean MTD announced in 2015 pushed through in 2019 for VAT and then all but scraped in 2023 to be reviewed again is ridiculous and now this next farce starting up in 2024. This is what we pay out Taxes for . The article written shows that something is being introduced that is of benefit to no one apart from the vanity of HMRC. Awful.

Thanks (33)
Replying to GHarr497688:
avatar
By Open all hours
01st Jun 2023 20:27

Could not have put it better. Thank you for such an accurate and honest assessment of the MTD farce which is only being kept alive by changing the whole system to fit its ridiculous requirements. HMRC, The Treasury, nor our own MP who is supposed to have an interest in the small business sector give a damn. Shame on the lot of them.

Thanks (19)
Replying to GHarr497688:
avatar
By wyoming
02nd Jun 2023 10:08

Totally agree. It's a farce. HMRC/HM Treasury can't make any arguments any more for their measures being either necessary or fair. Accountants are seen as a nuisance. I'm also getting out as fast as possible. The MTD can being kicked down the road means that I won't really need to deal with that. Hurrah! But I will still be around to do TRs for the transition year re change of basis. Sigh. At least my parting gift to younger colleagues may be that I will have sorted that bit out for them!

Thanks (10)
avatar
By CJaneH
01st Jun 2023 16:31

To make tax simpler to understand and calculate I believe:
1 Income Tax Year should be changed to 31st March
2 Enforce Tax year basis on all new businesses.

I insisted on 31st March (or 5th April for CIS subbies) for all new business's since setting up in practice 24 years ago.
If the opportunity arose I changed the year end to 31st March (Very low profits or loss in a year).
On ceasing to trade this spring only client with a none 31st March Year end)

Enforcing Tax Year basis on existing soletraders and partnerships is going to create a lot of work.
I agree MTD and differing year ends will not work. But I disagrre with MTD being introduced at all.

Thanks (4)
Replying to CJaneH:
avatar
By johnfrancis
02nd Jun 2023 12:29

"business's" ?

Thanks (3)
Replying to CJaneH:
RLI
By lionofludesch
02nd Jun 2023 13:49

CJaneH wrote:

I insisted on 31st March (or 5th April for CIS subbies) for all new business's since setting up in practice 24 years ago.

But was that for your benefit or the client's ?

Thanks (1)
Replying to lionofludesch:
avatar
By CJaneH
05th Jun 2023 12:45

Basically
1 Inflation makes overlap relief worth very little in 10 or 20 years time
2 Try explaining overlap relief to any one

Thanks (0)
Replying to CJaneH:
RLI
By lionofludesch
05th Jun 2023 14:09

True - there's a few accountants who don't get it, as evidenced by the frequency of questions on this forum.

Whether it's useless after 20 years depends on circumstances. Some folk, particularly those who sell their services, don't come to a sudden stop on one random day. Rather, they gradually wind their business down to retirement. This is particularly true where the work is physical. It can also shift profits forward to a year in which Class 4 NI isn't payable.

There is no one-size-fits-all answer. Overlap relief can be your friend if you're wick enough.

Thanks (0)
Replying to CJaneH:
avatar
By agknight
05th Jun 2023 11:21

The tax system should work for the electorate, not the other way around.

When I started up I was concerned at lots of clients having 31st March year ends and the turnaround of accounts and assessments for them at a good customer service speed. I also deal a lot with seasonal businesses, where a calendar year makes sense to the coherence of the figures being looked at. Thus I encouraged new clients toa 31st December year end.

This works very well and I think its appalling that ts being changed at the behest of nobody with any intellectual integrity.

I used to always put my view forward and want to participate in shaping change. Alas no more, I have given up and will let idiots have their way.

Thanks (0)
Replying to agknight:
RLI
By lionofludesch
05th Jun 2023 14:11

agknight wrote:

The tax system should work for the electorate, not the other way around.

When I started up I was concerned at lots of clients having 31st March year ends and the turnaround of accounts and assessments for them at a good customer service speed.

That was a genuine fear back in 1996. The reality ? Not everyone rushed in with their books on 6th April. Work spaced itself out naturally. With the habitual stragglers, of course.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Catherine Newman
01st Jun 2023 17:04

I have very few clients with non-31 March year ends and am burying my head in the sand in the hope it will go away.

As for MTD I have asked an IFA whether he has got the Pershing CTCs yet and he hasn't. My Coutts clients haven't got theirs and probably won't get them until July.

HMRC are still trotting out the reconciliation line for not prepopulating the APIs stating reconciliation takes place between May and October. We need it now!

We don't need the added hassle of change of accounting dates.

Thanks (2)
Replying to Catherine Newman:
Pile of Stones
By Beach Accountancy
02nd Jun 2023 10:35

I read it as Perishing CTC's - which I think is a far better name.

Thanks (2)
Replying to Catherine Newman:
Morph
By kevinringer
12th Jun 2023 09:50

99% of my new clients are 31 March (or 5 April if CIS). But I act for a lot of farming partnerships that have been in existence for decades and have a mixture of year ends for numerous commercial and historical reasons. Forcing them to switch to 31 March just to satisfy HMRC's current whim is not something they wish, but the alternative of using estimated figures isn't something we want either because an estimate is not fixed: it will vary as the year progresses. Take for example a 31 January year end. When submitting the 2029-30 Tax Return in the latter half of 2030 we will have to estimate 2/12th of y/e 31/01/2031. The estimate we make at the time might differ to one made a few months later, and the tax could impact payments on 31/01/2030, so changes will impact interest and cashflow. Farms have massively fluctuating profits, which is what averaging relief is designed to deal with. It's a right mess. It certainly adds complexity. We may yet decide to switch all to 31 March because it might be easier in the long run, even if there are commercial reasons for retaining the existing year end.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Hugo Fair
01st Jun 2023 19:56

You need to credit Edwin Starr for your punchline, Rebecca :=)

In reality of course, the answer to your question is ... to save face (and knighthoods/pensions) of a select few who no longer feel the need for any pretence that this will deliver *any* benefit either to individual taxpayers or the nation state.

Thanks (5)
Replying to Hugo Fair:
avatar
By Andy Reeves
02nd Jun 2023 10:04

The original was by The Temptations.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Andy Reeves:
avatar
By johnjenkins
02nd Jun 2023 10:33

Don't you mean wariginal. Come on it's Friday.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Andy Reeves:
avatar
By Hugo Fair
02nd Jun 2023 12:10

Recorded by them first, but wimped out on releasing it as a single ... leaving it to Edwin to score a No 1 (and then belatedly including it on their next album).

Thanks (2)
Replying to Hugo Fair:
avatar
By johnjenkins
02nd Jun 2023 12:48

Whenever I hear it, it always reminds me of Chris Tucker and Jackie Chan in Rush Hour.

Thanks (1)
avatar
By TAS1234
02nd Jun 2023 09:52

Why on earth doesn't the Government do away with this stupid 5th April date and revert to calendar months? They don't have a clue!

Thanks (3)
Replying to TAS1234:
Tornado
By Tornado
02nd Jun 2023 11:47

With some people choosing 31st March as their year end and some the 5th April (and presumably any of the days in between) there seems to be large window of opportunity for a bit of financial jiggery pokery which could not happen if there was just one official year end, such as 31st March.

This should have been sorted out long before £3,000 million was spent this pathetic project.

What sort of numpties dreamed up this chaos.

Thanks (4)
Replying to TAS1234:
avatar
By AndrewV12
02nd Jun 2023 12:00

Good point
Everybody thinks the tax year ending 5th April is a bit odd, but no one changes it, but a year end of 31 December would be a disaster and ruin our Christmases.

Thanks (0)
Replying to TAS1234:
RLI
By lionofludesch
02nd Jun 2023 14:03

TAS1234 wrote:

Why on earth doesn't the Government do away with this stupid 5th April date and revert to calendar months? They don't have a clue!

What ?

And get 360 days services for 365 days' tax ?

No thanks!

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Self-Employed and Happy
02nd Jun 2023 09:56

Any Sole Traders / Partnerships we have are in the process of being or have already been changed to 31/03 year ends.

I don't believe this benefits anyone at all BUT I do see logic in all unincorporated businesses having the same year end.

I will echo what someone has already said on here, I also genuinely believe HMRC and actually Cloud Accounting providers are trying to push accountants out, this wouldn't worry me if I was nearly at retirement and I completely understand why loads of people are getting out of the profession, however my I am 38 and my partner 31, we have so many years left in this game, to be perfectly honest we have really noticed a loss of enjoyment since COVID and in the last 6 years a HUGE decline in not only the service provided by HMRC but the accessibility of HMRC to agents.

In my view the way we are going will only serve to increase the tax gap, which when you think reducing the tax gap was a huge "selling point" from HMRC to everyone, it would seem appropriate that the incompetence of Government and Civil Servants would give an opposite result to what was hoped.

HMRC should NOT be run by Civil Servants but by Accountants in my opinion, also the MP responsible for HMRC should have a position on the Cabinet, we have Cabinet positions to decide every single facet of how we spend the money, but inextricably not a position on the Cabinet responsible solely for how we retrieve that money in the first place.

Thanks (10)
Replying to Self-Employed and Happy:
avatar
By TAS1234
02nd Jun 2023 11:47

What do you expect with Jeremy Hunt as Chancellor? Being the ex health minister, and not a very good one at that, how comes he is now the main person in the Cabinet looking after the country's finances. Incredible.

Thanks (4)
Replying to Self-Employed and Happy:
avatar
By moneymanager
04th Jun 2023 01:39

"In my view the way we are going will only serve to increase the tax gap, which when you think reducing the tax gap was a huge "selling point" from HMRC to everyone, it would seem appropriate that the incompetence of Government and Civil Servants would give an opposite result to what was hoped."

When we are "Happy and owning nothing" and all recipts and payments are made through the BIS controlled Central Bank Ditital Currency we will effectively be on rations and "money" will be no more than vouchers to use at the bank's sole discretion or not, there will be no need for accountants as there will be no private business at least not outside MegaCorp inc.

Thanks (2)
avatar
By JayneA
02nd Jun 2023 10:04

Could not have put it better myself!

Add into the arguement a client that intends to retire in say 2025 (as a lot of the non 5thApril businesses are by their virute "older") a lot of "FAFF" and presumably unable to spread the tax pain past thier cessation date.

Please lobby the HMRC \ Government \ your MP to drop this

Thanks (1)
David Ross
By davidross
02nd Jun 2023 10:35

A lot of work ---- for those who did not face up to this years ago.

Prior to Self Assessment our clients reported to 30 April, as it was in their interests. When SA came in I foresaw that Transitional Overlap Relief would be a ticking bomb, since it was calculated as an amount not a proportion. No allowance for inflation nor growth in business success. So when a business ceased (sometimes outside the control of the proprietor) there could be a massive bill, possibly the triggering of Higher Rates.

I put in the spade work then, averaging 35 months' of profits, quite painless for the clients, quite a lot of work for me, but I could always sleep at night.

I have no sympathy now that the chickens have come home to roost (except for those who have to clear up the mess left by their predecessors).

Thanks (4)
Replying to davidross:
RLI
By lionofludesch
02nd Jun 2023 14:05

davidross wrote:

A lot of work ---- for those who did not face up to this years ago.

Prior to Self Assessment our clients reported to 30 April, as it was in their interests. When SA came in I foresaw that Transitional Overlap Relief would be a ticking bomb, since it was calculated as an amount not a proportion. No allowance for inflation nor growth in business success. So when a business ceased (sometimes outside the control of the proprietor) there could be a massive bill, possibly the triggering of Higher Rates.

I put in the spade work then, averaging 35 months' of profits, quite painless for the clients, quite a lot of work for me, but I could always sleep at night.

I have no sympathy now that the chickens have come home to roost (except for those who have to clear up the mess left by their predecessors).

As you never tire of saying .........

Thanks (7)
Replying to lionofludesch:
David Ross
By davidross
06th Jun 2023 13:03

Thank you for noticing !

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Robin Wishart
02nd Jun 2023 10:37

Many of our clients were set up with year ends of 30 April to maximise the initial tax deferral, particularly when profits in first year were likely to be low.
It would be easy to shorten the 30 April 2023 AP to end 31 March 23.
This would mean two financial periods ending in Tax Year 2022/23.
I think this is treated as extending the AP ending 30 April 22 to 31 March 23
As this is an extension of more than 6 months, it is not allowed (I think) - it wasn't last year when I tried.
Is it possible for 2022/23 as part of the changeover process?
If it is possible, is it likely to be worth doing or is it best to leave the change to 2023/24?

Thanks (0)
Replying to Robin Wishart:
David Ross
By davidross
03rd Jun 2023 11:32

In my view, a business should have enough money it its Balance Sheet to meet its tax obligations. So for instance a company with a. £10,000 Corporation Tax liability due on 31 December should have that much on deposit as at 31 March.

As and when your clients find themselves in financial difficulties, they will only have themselves to blame for using the Tax Man's money

An old fashioned view perhaps, but supported by Alan Sugar and many who don't trade at the risk of HMRC

Thanks (1)
Replying to davidross:
RLI
By lionofludesch
03rd Jun 2023 12:02

davidross wrote:

In my view, a business should have enough money it its Balance Sheet to meet its tax obligations. So for instance a company with a. £10,000 Corporation Tax liability due on 31 December should have that much on deposit as at 31 March.

As and when your clients find themselves in financial difficulties, they will only have themselves to blame for using the Tax Man's money

An old fashioned view perhaps, but supported by Alan Sugar and many who don't trade at the risk of HMRC

Should a company have enough cash to deposit to pay its trade creditors too, which more than likely fall due long before its Corporation Tax ?

Thanks (3)
Replying to lionofludesch:
avatar
By Hugo Fair
03rd Jun 2023 15:56

"should" is putting it far too strongly ... managing risk is to a large extent a matter for the business owner(s).

I never realised before that I shared any opinions with Mr. Amstrad but, maybe due to a similarity in age, I always applied my '90 day rule' in each of my personal businesses.

Oh, 90 day rule?
A simple cashflow-forecasting control based on 'worst-case scenario' modelling ... whereby you assume no cash will be collected for 90 days, and check that cash-in-hand covers everything that is contracted (very much including PAYE & VAT) to be payable during that period.
[As an aside, this makes it very easy to tie decisions on any discretionary spending to the collection of cash ... in reality not that simplistic but you get the picture].

Unlike, I presume, the Sugar ... this went hand-in-glove with my refusal ever to countenance borrowing (Micawber being my poster boy)!

Thanks (1)
Replying to Robin Wishart:
RLI
By lionofludesch
03rd Jun 2023 17:34

Robin Wishart wrote:

Many of our clients were set up with year ends of 30 April to maximise the initial tax deferral, particularly when profits in first year were likely to be low.
It would be easy to shorten the 30 April 2023 AP to end 31 March 23.
This would mean two financial periods ending in Tax Year 2022/23.
I think this is treated as extending the AP ending 30 April 22 to 31 March 23
As this is an extension of more than 6 months, it is not allowed (I think) - it wasn't last year when I tried.
Is it possible for 2022/23 as part of the changeover process?
If it is possible, is it likely to be worth doing or is it best to leave the change to 2023/24?

I don't grasp what you're getting at here. At some point, you're going to need to have another eleven months profits in exchange for the overlap relief. You're not shortening a period, you're lengthening it to 23 months. You would need to prepare two sets of accounts, as you say.

Yes, you can do this in 2022/23. It might be beneficial, it might not. It depends entirely on the numbers. But you won't be able to spread any excess profits over five years. That's only for accounting date changes in 2023/24.

Yes, you can start the process in 2022/23 by moving the accounting date to, say, June. Effectively, you're then spreading over six years. Again, might be worthwhile, might not.

Thanks (0)
By SteveHa
02nd Jun 2023 11:07

HMRC get a benefit that hasn't been mentioned, yet (and being HMRC's benefit, it's the taxpayer's pain).

Think of a business with an APE 28 February, which doesn't wish to change. They will have to estimate profits for the period 1 March - 5 April every year in order to meet the filing deadline. Let's suppose, for argument's sake, that they file their Return by 31 May, and so the enquiry window closes 31 May the following year.

The second set of accounts for the 28 February are completed by mid-May, and an amendment to the already submitted Return is required, and filed, coincidentally, on 31 May. Bang, HMRC have another 12 month's enquiry window.

Thanks (0)
Replying to SteveHa:
RLI
By lionofludesch
03rd Jun 2023 17:39

SteveHa wrote:

HMRC get a benefit that hasn't been mentioned, yet (and being HMRC's benefit, it's the taxpayer's pain).

Think of a business with an APE 28 February, which doesn't wish to change. They will have to estimate profits for the period 1 March - 5 April every year in order to meet the filing deadline. Let's suppose, for argument's sake, that they file their Return by 31 May, and so the enquiry window closes 31 May the following year.

The second set of accounts for the 28 February are completed by mid-May, and an amendment to the already submitted Return is required, and filed, coincidentally, on 31 May. Bang, HMRC have another 12 month's enquiry window.

I'd strongly advise such a client to change his accounting date. If you're going to have a rogue year end, it needs to be before the clocks go back. Gives you time to prepare the accounts and get them on the return.

A February year end is just asking for trouble.

Thanks (0)
Replying to SteveHa:
avatar
By Ardeninian
06th Jun 2023 12:53

But that just leaves HMRC in the same position they are now.

Using your example, at present someone with a 28/29 February year end would file the 2024 accounts on the 2023/24 return on 31 May 2024, and the 2025 accounts on the 2024/25 return on 31 May 2025.

Under the new system the 2025 accounts will contribute to the filing of both the amended 2023/24 return and the 2024/25 return, both submitted on 31 May 2025. So HMRC have until 31 May 2026 to enquire into the 28 February 2025 accounts in both circumstances.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Ardeninian:
RLI
By lionofludesch
06th Jun 2023 13:22

Ardeninian wrote:

But that just leaves HMRC in the same position they are now.

Using your example, at present someone with a 28/29 February year end would file the 2024 accounts on the 2023/24 return on 31 May 2024, and the 2025 accounts on the 2024/25 return on 31 May 2025.

Under the new system the 2025 accounts will contribute to the filing of both the amended 2023/24 return and the 2024/25 return, both submitted on 31 May 2025. So HMRC have until 31 May 2026 to enquire into the 28 February 2025 accounts in both circumstances.

You probably need to rethink that. It's nonsense. Even if you could file a return on the last day of your accounting period, like the subcontractors do.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By AndrewV12
02nd Jun 2023 11:55

I think overall, its not a bad idea bearing in mind most of my clients are on the 5th April year end, prior to this legislation surfacing.

Also when a client and has a year end not tying in to the tax year, some surprises are thrown up when the client retires/ goes paye particularly if CIS is involved.

Thanks (0)
Replying to AndrewV12:
RLI
By lionofludesch
03rd Jun 2023 17:40

AndrewV12 wrote:

I think overall, its not a bad idea bearing in mind most of my clients are on the 5th April year end, prior to this legislation surfacing.

Also when a client and has a year end not tying in to the tax year, some surprises are thrown up when the client retires/ goes paye particularly if CIS is involved.

Easy to say when none of your clients are affected.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By RAMESHARJAN
02nd Jun 2023 12:51

So if a client is a LLP with 30th April year end and they change their accounting date to 31st March 2024, they will have an accounting date of 23 months. Will the companies house accept accounts for 23 months? If not how will this work?

Thanks (0)
Replying to RAMESHARJAN:
avatar
By Catherine Newman
02nd Jun 2023 13:11

That's a very good point.

Thanks (0)
Replying to RAMESHARJAN:
RLI
By lionofludesch
02nd Jun 2023 14:08

RAMESHARJAN wrote:

So if a client is a LLP with 30th April year end and they change their accounting date to 31st March 2024, they will have an accounting date of 23 months. Will the companies house accept accounts for 23 months? If not how will this work?

There's company/LLP law and there's tax law. You'll need to comply with both.

If that means a 12+11 for Companies House, rather than a 23, that's what you'll have to do.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Ajtms
02nd Jun 2023 13:01

The only point as I see it is so that the Government can collect in extra tax by stealth from the half-million or so self-employed people who do not have a 31 March / 5 April year end. For those with 30 April year ends in particular there will be 23 months income to assess to both tax & NIC all in 2023/2024. Even allowing for the 5 year spread the increase in their liabilities is unaffordable at a time when mortgage interest, fuel and food costs are rising. Clients will not be able to afford this tax (often higher rate tax where they are naturally basic rate taxpayers) and therefore will not be able to pay our fees, forcing us to work for free. This is aside from MTD which is still on the horizon. This policy is a guaranteed way of losing votes for a party who promised to nurture and support small business.

Thanks (1)
Replying to Ajtms:
RLI
By lionofludesch
02nd Jun 2023 14:12

Ajtms wrote:

For those with 30 April year ends in particular there will be 23 months income to assess to both tax & NIC all in 2023/2024.

Less 11 months overlap relief, of course. Plus an opportunity to spread over five years, an opportunity which somebody who ceased trading before the new legislation kicked in will not have had.

Thanks (1)
Replying to lionofludesch:
avatar
By Ajtms
02nd Jun 2023 14:36

For most business that have been trading for 20 years or so the overlap relief is minimal and for some businesses zero due to start up losses. If ceasing before retirement then point accepted, but most intend to trade until retirement when there will be no NIC and no likelihood of higher rate tax.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Ajtms:
avatar
By johnjenkins
02nd Jun 2023 14:34

"Losing votes" there is no possible way the Tories or Labour will have a majority. The voters are fed up with politicians who only give us what's good for their party, not what's good for our country.

Thanks (2)
Replying to johnjenkins:
avatar
By Ajtms
02nd Jun 2023 14:38

Let's hope the electorate strongly makes that point at the next election

Thanks (0)
Replying to Ajtms:
avatar
By johnjenkins
02nd Jun 2023 15:39

I have no doubt they will.

Thanks (0)
Replying to johnjenkins:
avatar
By moneymanager
05th Jun 2023 09:45

"for their party", I'm not sure that even that holds sway now, more like what they are told to do as lakeys of our global controlers.

Thanks (1)

Pages