It is arguably too easy now to set up a new limited company, so this change probably makes sense.
And once CH has done all its due diligence, then surely banks and other financial organisations should be able to simplify their account opening processes, safe in the knowledge that CH has done the work for them.
Then they might remember that they are there to serve customers rather than regulators. Anyone tried to open a bank account for a SME or small non-profit lately?
My concern is that the they will give themselves even more powers as, do all buraucracies.
Having been a business owner since 1979, I now have to spend over half my time on regulatory matters, rather than growing the business.
A much lower rate of IHT - 20% being the BRT - levied on each beneficiary would be an improvement, though it still doesn't resolve the injustice of taxes on taxes and taxes on taxed taxes.
I also agree that CT should not be charged on undistributed profits because it removes investment funds from the business, especially SMEs, reducing their potential rate of growth. When it's distributed, tax the recipient. Unfortunately, it is an idea that will never fly. Far too sensible.
You are right that we "crave a tax system that rewards long-term investments", but CGT does the opposite because it is not indexed linked . (It used to be). It is an iniquitous tax because it taxes inflation. The longer you hold the asset, the more inflation you get taxed on. Therefore long term investment is actually penalised, whereas it should be rewarded.
Since the IHT threshold was frozen, property prices have more than doubled. So IHT is also a tax on inflation, as evidenced by the trebling of IHT revenues in recent years.
Restoring index linking, back-dated to acquisition dates, to both these taxes would at least make them fairer or less less unfair depending on your point of view.
Bold root and branch tax reform is what is needed, not the parsimonious Treasury tinkering and stealth taxes we've been getting for the past 2 or 3 decades. Unfortunately, anyone who tries it gets booted out - not by the electorate but by the unelected Establishment.
A key question seems to be: Were the savings scheme contributions made after tax and NI had been calculated, or when the employee withdrew the cash from the savings scheme? In other words, were tax and NI calculated on the full gross pay?
If the savings contributions were deducted from net pay, then there is surely no case to answer, and HMRC has wasted taxpayers money that should have been spent chasing the big guns.
To your list of priorities, I would add:
Make sure everyone in every area has access to strong 4G mobile signals (and 5G when that comes).
This will require open roaming across different phone networks within the UK. 100% reliable and fast digital communications land based and mobile are a far higher priority than physical travel speeds. They will require huge investments.
I'm a Marketer, not an accountant, but how can you "maintain the core essence and legacy of the Baker Tilly brand" when you throw away the only recognised symbol of that legacy, and replace it with a brand which is shared by dozens of other businesses, over whose "values and essences" you have no control, in dozens of other countries, whose culture and values may be quite different?
My answers
It is arguably too easy now to set up a new limited company, so this change probably makes sense.
And once CH has done all its due diligence, then surely banks and other financial organisations should be able to simplify their account opening processes, safe in the knowledge that CH has done the work for them.
Then they might remember that they are there to serve customers rather than regulators. Anyone tried to open a bank account for a SME or small non-profit lately?
My concern is that the they will give themselves even more powers as, do all buraucracies.
Having been a business owner since 1979, I now have to spend over half my time on regulatory matters, rather than growing the business.
A much lower rate of IHT - 20% being the BRT - levied on each beneficiary would be an improvement, though it still doesn't resolve the injustice of taxes on taxes and taxes on taxed taxes.
I also agree that CT should not be charged on undistributed profits because it removes investment funds from the business, especially SMEs, reducing their potential rate of growth. When it's distributed, tax the recipient. Unfortunately, it is an idea that will never fly. Far too sensible.
You are right that we "crave a tax system that rewards long-term investments", but CGT does the opposite because it is not indexed linked . (It used to be). It is an iniquitous tax because it taxes inflation. The longer you hold the asset, the more inflation you get taxed on. Therefore long term investment is actually penalised, whereas it should be rewarded.
Since the IHT threshold was frozen, property prices have more than doubled. So IHT is also a tax on inflation, as evidenced by the trebling of IHT revenues in recent years.
Restoring index linking, back-dated to acquisition dates, to both these taxes would at least make them fairer or less less unfair depending on your point of view.
Bold root and branch tax reform is what is needed, not the parsimonious Treasury tinkering and stealth taxes we've been getting for the past 2 or 3 decades. Unfortunately, anyone who tries it gets booted out - not by the electorate but by the unelected Establishment.
A key question seems to be: Were the savings scheme contributions made after tax and NI had been calculated, or when the employee withdrew the cash from the savings scheme? In other words, were tax and NI calculated on the full gross pay?
If the savings contributions were deducted from net pay, then there is surely no case to answer, and HMRC has wasted taxpayers money that should have been spent chasing the big guns.
To your list of priorities, I would add:
Make sure everyone in every area has access to strong 4G mobile signals (and 5G when that comes).
This will require open roaming across different phone networks within the UK. 100% reliable and fast digital communications land based and mobile are a far higher priority than physical travel speeds. They will require huge investments.
Branding in a global age aint so easy
No, but at least RSM Baker Tilly would both demonstrate the global reach of the firm, and that RSM is "a network of fully independent member firms".
Baker Silly
A silly move in my view.
I'm a Marketer, not an accountant, but how can you "maintain the core essence and legacy of the Baker Tilly brand" when you throw away the only recognised symbol of that legacy, and replace it with a brand which is shared by dozens of other businesses, over whose "values and essences" you have no control, in dozens of other countries, whose culture and values may be quite different?