Member Since: 1st Jul 2002
6th Jul 2020
Isn't the thing about 'normal' hours for the scheme that they should be stated in an employment contract. Since many OMB directors don't have employment contracts they won't have any stated normal hours and therefore there is no basis for a part-time furlough claim? Maybe not 'fair', but less open to abuse than a 'whatever you feel' number that can't be defined/determined subjectively.
22nd Apr 2020
I would say it has to be the former, on the basis that the grant is paid based on actual costs incurred. The alternative would be reimbursing a figure that has not been a cost to the company.
22nd Apr 2020
start of claim period refers to the period covered by the claim, e.g. if claiming costs for the period 17/3-30/4 the start date is 17/3. Employees furloughed after 17/3 but before 30/4 are still included in that one claim, the amount claimed for those employees being calculated from their furlough start date but still falling within this claim period
4th Mar 2020
Going back to the original question, even if there was a drop in turnover of the company that would not give her any entitlement to claim anything. That would be a loss to her employer, not her personally. Her loss is her salary, if the company don't pay her, as per David's initial response.
I don't think employers are entitled to any sort of compensation, although if it would be significant she could consider whether it constitutes a reason to be excused from jury service (I don't know what constitutes a valid reason, just that it is possible to be excused in certain circumstances)
5th Nov 2018
In that scenario all shareholders would be entitled to share in any dividend declared - the starting position has to be on the premise that a dividend IS declared, otherwise as you say ordinary shares could never qualify.
In the alphabet shares scenario, the issue is that when a dividend is declared no shareholder has an actual entitlement to share in it - a dividend could be paid on just the A shares (for example), with none for the B or C shareholders.
10th Aug 2017
But if you know that the 'reply to' email address is genuine then the reply email should go to that address. As mabzden said, the only way a hacker could access that is if they have hacked their email system/mail server. Spoofing alone can't divert the response to the spoofed email received.
15th Jun 2016
I looked into this when tagging requirements changed a couple of years ago.
The requirement is that _if_ a detailed P&L is submitted with the tax return then it should be tagged, but there is no requirement to submit a detailed P&L.
Clearly, if it means that less information is available to HMRC when reviewing comps and accounts it may make an enquiry more likely so that they can get that information, but there is no obligation to submit a DP&L.
30th Jan 2015
I was born in 1972 but can't see a problem with this - I calculated in shillings to compare rather than pennies, but same difference really.
The extra channels point is really interesting - even at analogue switch off the frequency spectrum in use couldn't, allowing for overlaps between regions, handle more than half a dozen channels! I suppose they may have envisaged a cable network with distribution over the same frequency spectrum.
30th Apr 2010
The need to write to HMRC is to claim repayment of any s419 amounts paid in previous years, which is not repayable until 9 months after the end of the year of the write off. HMRC will often reject claims made before the 9 months is up and ask you to reclaim it later.
26th Jan 2009
Euan said "the company has no control over when the loan will be repaid."
Surely, in the absence of an agreement to the contrary [and how many of those have you seen] the company is entitled to require the loan to be repaid at any time. Certainly if it ended up in the hands of an administrator then he/she would be looking to enforce the company's right to recover the debt asap.