Member Since: 29th Jul 2009
2nd Oct 2019
To be precise, I'd prefer reduction in Employer's NI rather than reduction in wages.
18th Sep 2019
As Paul says, FRS102 states that the finance charge should be allocated to periods to give a constant periodic rate of charge on the remaining balance of the liability. While FRS102 provides no alternative, SSAP21 said the same but went on to say 'or a reasonable approximation thereto'. SOD will give you a good approximation for a mortgage style amortisation profile with equal repayments but if the profile varies from that, it may not. It's no harder to produce the appropriate interest rate so I'd use that but SOD would likely be good enough if the profile is 'mortgage style'.
11th Sep 2019
It might not take long but, as has been said, there are various things to consider, including VAT registration, PAYE schemes, ER, etc. so £350 is what I would usually ask for and have never been pushed back on. This seems like good value to me and to the client.
4th Sep 2019
Agree with comments about using your basic rate band as far as possible - and your wife's. As a director (assuming she is a director of your company) I don't see that paying her £8.4k would be controversial.
Also think about going through a mortgage broker. A good one should know which banks are offering the best rate and are smart enough to look at the company's financial position combined with your own.
9th Aug 2019
As long as the information is completely anonomised and the identity of the other client can't be discerned from other sources, I can't see why the numbers can't be used as a comparison. If you're talking to Airbus, probably best not to share Boeing's numbers! If you share your client list then you'd need to be careful but if its a fairly generic business I can't see a problem. You could round the figures so not to the penny and/or lump various cost or sales categories together. Perhaps, as others have suggested, using high level figures and percentages would be the best way to go. It's the message that's important not the actual figures.
31st Jul 2019
This is a form of HP but if OP figures are correct, this is not a bargain purchase option so the tax and accounting treatment are not the same as an HP agreement with a bargain purchase option. At the start, there appears to be no 'likelihood' that the option will be exercised which means capital allowances would not be available to the hire purchasee. The sum of the mimimum hire purchase repayments clearly amounts to less than 90% of the asset's value and the asset should not therefore be shown on the balance sheet. The repayments should be accounted for on a straight line basis which would appear to be £362.81 per month. Caveat: Lease accounting rules have just changed and I can't claim to be completely across those at the mo.
31st May 2019
I suspect you posted here because, while you know the answer, you anticipate having to have quite a difficult conversation with (presumably) your employer. However it's been said, the resounding response on here is to agree that this is a big no no. Unfortunately you are going to have to have that conversation but now you can have it knowing that everyone here agrees with your feeling. It may be painful in the short term but you'll be glad you did. If you haven't done it yet, do it now before the weekend so it's not hanging over you. Good luck!
5th Apr 2019
It's one of the first things I would change. Clients are confused enough without this silly 5th April thing. Wonder how many hours are spent dealing with it, explaining it, managing it etc. Responding to emails about it! Doesn't sit well with a modern tax system. Same with paying pensions 4 weekly. I don't think I have a single client who realises this?!!
4th Feb 2019
Only 4 or 5 clients out of about 100 seem to have had letters from HMRC about MTD. I think this may be because HMRC have been too busy sending out their daft and unnecessary letters about paying PAYE electronically. Year after year they arrive and year after year they're opened and shredded. What a waste.
29th Oct 2018
I agree and find the PAYE information to be almost unfathomable. It's also a different view from what the client can see on their own log in and a different screeen when HMRC look. We deserve better.