You should also include another possibility. That any fraud simply isn't material/ is trival. in which case audit procedures just won't (or are unlikely to) identify it.
Have to wonder however how profitable the audit work is (hint: not much). This would either push up audit fees, or drive audit standards even lower.
How attractive a 'audit only' business would be is questionable.
I'm pretty sure those which are saying 'make it voluntary' actually mean 'make it so we don't have to bother'.
Which isn't very helpful.
I sense this may get political, and this isn't the place...ok, I started it! You can't deny that the booming gig economy, loaded as it is with injustice for the "little man" is certainly a sign of things getting worse for those at the bottom.
And I simply do not understand how Uber and their grubby like can get away with claiming their workers are self-employed when they plainly are not. No sympathy for the "employer" in those circumstances, at all.
This is happening all over the world, not just the UK, so blamingit on Brexit (when we only voted 1 year ago today) seems to be...reaching a bit.
Anyone want to volunteer?? Hello??? Hello??? anyone there??
In other words. It's an entire clusterf*** waiting to happen and should go back to the drawing board.
IE exactly what nearly all us accountants have been saying from the start.
The explanatory note for the VAT changes seems very odd.
They state that the are 411,000 FRS businesses
And they think 123,000 have limited costs.
BUT only 4,000 businesses will go onto the "normal" VAT scheme. This is clearly absurd as virtually all of our FRS scheme members will be going onto the normal scheme as they will incur a fair amount of services with VAT on, such as our fees for starters!
It is as if the explanatory note was written for "goods and services", and then the "services" crossed out later on.
Perhaps we could offer free accountancy services with the purchase of a box of paper. The box would cost as much as their previous accountancy fees.
I'd have to buy in more paper which would help my FRS issue too.
This really is crap legislation isn't it. If the finanical benefit of 'getting around it' is in excess of the cost, then it's logical to do so. Even if it means incurring artificial costs.
Either reform it (the flat rate scheme) properly, or remove it entirely.
Doesn't say anything more than what we know already. Looks like it falls back on the VAT definition of 'goods' and 'services'.
So, £2,000 of stationery and computer consumables for everyone each year?
' But there is one word standing in the way: mandation. If we are to move back into a truly collaborative space, we need to get beyond the mandation barrier.”
Problem is, what possible benefit is MTD (in terms of the transmission of data) to the taxpayer? I can't see one. The current system works fine for them. Submit one form once a year nine odd months after the year end.
Why would anyone submit quarterly data unless there was a carrot (in excess of the additional cost) attached?
I think this is getting to the nitty gritty why this is so problematic on a practical level which is good. Many sole traders and small business don't have their own dedicated business bank accounts and credit cards, and even those which do often mix up business and personal, either by mistake in using the wrong account, or mistakingly thinking they can claim things which they can't.