Great idea. The OP has no clue in the first place and you are suggesting he has a stab at offering his employee advice on his residence status. Genius.
It's bang on the money. The cheeky s0d comes on here asking for advice on how to pay someone for their time and skills but because it's accountancy/tax related, he thinks that advice should be available for free.
Not sure PPR relief requires consideration of "legality"of occupation, does it? Surely (and without me looking at the legislation!) it's a question of fact whether a property has been your PPR. I don't really understand the point your client is making but as long as you have a "filing position" then claim PPR and see what happens.
Whilst it's easy to agree with your conclusion, absent a proper understanding of the bookkeeper's rationale (if any), I don't think you can properly opine.
Does it misrepresent them or is it merely that people should not read too much into the graphics. (vide Berkshire Hathaway)
My interpretation is that it is intended to make the business appear to have far greater substance than the accounts suggests it has. Why refer to a "team" when evidence suggests that there isn't one?
The website refers to "Our dedicated team ..." who, if you take the accounts at face value, are pretty badly paid!
Can't believe how bullsh!tters have the brass neck to create a flashy website that (from what we can see) completely misrepresents what and who they are.
I am assuming they are because they have been paid by virtue of the employment, but I cannot find any specific legislation to cover this.
It's earnings, end of, I would have thought. The funds from which the employer pays are irrelevant. I suppose it might conceivably be different if the employer paid premiums on a policy taken out by the employee. In that case, though, the premiums would have been a BIK (or payroll item) and payments under the policy wouldn't have been made to the employer.
My answers
A competent one should be able to cope.
If you are confident no tax arises in HK, then you don't need an international tax specialist.
What did the balance sheet look like when the company was dissolved? Who was advising the directors?
Great idea. The OP has no clue in the first place and you are suggesting he has a stab at offering his employee advice on his residence status. Genius.
Fixed that for you: "In your opinion ....".
It's bang on the money. The cheeky s0d comes on here asking for advice on how to pay someone for their time and skills but because it's accountancy/tax related, he thinks that advice should be available for free.
You mean he doesn't give his skills for free like people on this site? How odd to want to be paid for his efforts.
Not sure PPR relief requires consideration of "legality"of occupation, does it? Surely (and without me looking at the legislation!) it's a question of fact whether a property has been your PPR. I don't really understand the point your client is making but as long as you have a "filing position" then claim PPR and see what happens.
Whilst it's easy to agree with your conclusion, absent a proper understanding of the bookkeeper's rationale (if any), I don't think you can properly opine.
Maybe the terms of the legacy have some bearing??
My interpretation is that it is intended to make the business appear to have far greater substance than the accounts suggests it has. Why refer to a "team" when evidence suggests that there isn't one?
The website refers to "Our dedicated team ..." who, if you take the accounts at face value, are pretty badly paid!
Can't believe how bullsh!tters have the brass neck to create a flashy website that (from what we can see) completely misrepresents what and who they are.
It's earnings, end of, I would have thought. The funds from which the employer pays are irrelevant. I suppose it might conceivably be different if the employer paid premiums on a policy taken out by the employee. In that case, though, the premiums would have been a BIK (or payroll item) and payments under the policy wouldn't have been made to the employer.