I'm voting to remain. But I detest psuedo-arguments like the one you advance 'think of the children'. It's not justified.
Your argument is that because our parents made a decision 4 decades ago we should put up with its consequences for ever more at any cost.
Those considering Brexit are understandably concerned about sovereignty - a truly immense issue not the trivial "short-sighted political consideration" you claim. Their consideration deserve respect.
Stop impuning the intentions of the others and instead make the positive case for staying in the EU.
So let me get this right, the complaint is that HMRC is not accommodating (at my expense) the cost of handling an arbitrarily large number of calls from people who have put off doing paper work they could have done any time in the previous six months. And this complaint is supported by members of the accounting profession?
Why does O'Nolan think he escapes VAT MOSS just because the organization is moved outside the EU? Sure, if the organization does not sell to EU citizens then there is no problem - but if that's true there never was a problem. If O'Nolan sells to EU citizens then he has to charge and collect VAT wherever the organization is based.
We created a system for selling our digital products and supporting the new VAT arrangements ahead of the January 2015 start date and have since provided the software to nearly 400 small EU and non-EU businesses that sell digital products in some form. You can whinge and whine about the law all you like but its not going to change without the agreement of all member states - and we know how likely that is. So isn't it best to get on with meeting the legal obligations not actively evading them? How does that help stakeholders of the organization?
And I absolutely don't recognize the characterization of HMRC. Maybe I'm just lucky but whenever I've called, the help has been great. If the first person has been unable to help they've arranged for me to speak to a colleague or call back. Perhaps now I've written these comments my experience will be dreadful. But maybe, just maybe, O'Nolan has an attitude problem.
Not my experience I inadvertently overpaid by £2,500 at the end of the year. When I called the helpline they had me contact the RTI team who credited my account with the amount of the over payment and I reduced the amount paid in the first month of this year. Pretty simple.
Of course if you are putting in 12 RTI statements at the beginning of the year so you do't have the monthly hassle and get the payment wrong, or you are no longer paying PAYE tax the approach used for me will not work. But surely most companies, not all obviously, are going to be paying £10 or £12K over the course of the next few months so the need for an actual repayment is moot.
The EVATAction group claim that in a meeting with representatives from HMRC last December 19th they confirmed that 'objections' from other member states would go through HMRC and HMRC would determine if the the objection is valid.
Clearly this process was not followed in the Irish case so what is the process going forward? Can we expect to have to defend ourselves against claims by 28 tax authorities each quarter?
The claim the action group assert that HMRC will be a filter for objections seems rational especially for micro businesses that are in no position to fend off claims from any member state. It would probably have prevented the error by the Irish tax authority being sent out to UK companies as HMRC would be able to see the disparity in the sales made by some of the tiny companies and the corresponding demand.
This is a difficult one to judge. Henry Williamson makes many good points. I'm fortunate to be living in a big house in the London suburbs and have seen a huge capital appreciation in part because affluent middle-aged people have been able to purchase additional properties subsidized by the tax payer.
Meanwhile I have three adult children who have almost no hope of getting on the property ladder in London any time soon because house prices are so high. This budget measure is not going to solve the problem of lack of housing, especially affordable housing, but it may encourage some to sell properties and deter others from buying properties and, so, take some heat out of current prices.
The other side of the argument is that the allowance permitted people who are not 'wealthy' (like Joe in the example) but may have some disposable monthly cash to invest in property. A consequence of removing this allowance may result in wealthy people and businesses with available cash to mop up any property disposals with the effect that it concentrates wealth in the hands of the already wealthy.
Also, it has to be a concern to the Chancellor that the decision to allow people to invest there own pensions will see many more BTL landlords and this measure makes BTL investing a little less attractive (though still a better prospects than many annuity products).
As other commenters have suggested, the scenario you are describing is really a small proportion of the vendors affected. And then to suggest that some of the qualification criteria could be avoided by crafting a personal email seems to me to lack any merit. A bit like tax evasion is bad, tax avoidance is OK as long as it is not too extreme, this advice seems to me to be too extreme.
We small business owners that sell digital services have to get on this train, one the set off in 2005.Offering suggestions that seem to get perilously close to evasion doesn't seem helpful.
Another commenter suggested their services and there are others. For the digital services platform we use on www.lyquidity.com, which is Easy Digital Downloads, we created a plugin to collect the evidence required by the regulations, workout where the buyer is located and charge VAT or allow them to enter a VAT number. We make the plugin available to other users of this e-commerce platform so they can be compliant as well. And others have done the same for other platforms.
As has been commented, HMRC may take specific view on the application of VAT but view may not be shared by the tax authorities of other EU member states. Perhaps better would be a summary of the review available on the EU commission's web site.
This long document does a good job of summarizing the implications of the different articles, especially article 24 and sections a through f. However it is still a lot to take in and an intelligent review would benefit and enlighten everyone affected.
The ribbon is great. Sure things moved but the text, and so purpose, became more obvious. Also, often because the option then exists to do more stuff, its possible to review text formatting, table and graph styling before its applied. I'm glad Microsoft made the change.
As for Windows 8, update to Windows 8.1. It boots to the desktop. You can customize the start menu to meet your needs.
Of course if you are unwilling to change, stick with Windows XP. While it may be out of formal support, in practice Microsoft is still maintaining it from a security perspective.
The Excel community whinged and whined about the introduction of the Ribbon which, in my view, is a much better means of navigation than menus. No so the grey beards who just didn't want to change. They knew the command sequences, where all the little feature were tucked away. Imagine, then, if Microsoft, god forbid, changed the way columns are hidden and unhidden on the iPad. Can you imagine the hue and cry about Microsoft changing the interface again? My bet is that Microsoft learned from the introduction of the Ribbon not to do things in a better way.
... if you treat your staff like that it's not surprising that they up and leave!
But they are not upping and leaving. 2.5% is a low number for staff turnover in a large organisation. And this, for HMRC, is a high number. The conclusion has to be that HMRC is much better than average place to work. Or that staff down believe they will be successful obtaining gainful employment elsewhere. Or that managers are not doing the human resource part of their job and shepparding under performers out of the door.
My answers
I'm voting to remain. But I detest psuedo-arguments like the one you advance 'think of the children'. It's not justified.
Your argument is that because our parents made a decision 4 decades ago we should put up with its consequences for ever more at any cost.
Those considering Brexit are understandably concerned about sovereignty - a truly immense issue not the trivial "short-sighted political consideration" you claim. Their consideration deserve respect.
Stop impuning the intentions of the others and instead make the positive case for staying in the EU.
So let me get this right, the complaint is that HMRC is not accommodating (at my expense) the cost of handling an arbitrarily large number of calls from people who have put off doing paper work they could have done any time in the previous six months. And this complaint is supported by members of the accounting profession?
Silly comments
Why does O'Nolan think he escapes VAT MOSS just because the organization is moved outside the EU? Sure, if the organization does not sell to EU citizens then there is no problem - but if that's true there never was a problem. If O'Nolan sells to EU citizens then he has to charge and collect VAT wherever the organization is based.
We created a system for selling our digital products and supporting the new VAT arrangements ahead of the January 2015 start date and have since provided the software to nearly 400 small EU and non-EU businesses that sell digital products in some form. You can whinge and whine about the law all you like but its not going to change without the agreement of all member states - and we know how likely that is. So isn't it best to get on with meeting the legal obligations not actively evading them? How does that help stakeholders of the organization?
And I absolutely don't recognize the characterization of HMRC. Maybe I'm just lucky but whenever I've called, the help has been great. If the first person has been unable to help they've arranged for me to speak to a colleague or call back. Perhaps now I've written these comments my experience will be dreadful. But maybe, just maybe, O'Nolan has an attitude problem.
Not my experience
I inadvertently overpaid by £2,500 at the end of the year. When I called the helpline they had me contact the RTI team who credited my account with the amount of the over payment and I reduced the amount paid in the first month of this year. Pretty simple.
Of course if you are putting in 12 RTI statements at the beginning of the year so you do't have the monthly hassle and get the payment wrong, or you are no longer paying PAYE tax the approach used for me will not work. But surely most companies, not all obviously, are going to be paying £10 or £12K over the course of the next few months so the need for an actual repayment is moot.
Is this the correct procedure any way?
The EVATAction group claim that in a meeting with representatives from HMRC last December 19th they confirmed that 'objections' from other member states would go through HMRC and HMRC would determine if the the objection is valid.
Clearly this process was not followed in the Irish case so what is the process going forward? Can we expect to have to defend ourselves against claims by 28 tax authorities each quarter?
The claim the action group assert that HMRC will be a filter for objections seems rational especially for micro businesses that are in no position to fend off claims from any member state. It would probably have prevented the error by the Irish tax authority being sent out to UK companies as HMRC would be able to see the disparity in the sales made by some of the tiny companies and the corresponding demand.
This is a difficult one to judge. Henry Williamson makes many good points. I'm fortunate to be living in a big house in the London suburbs and have seen a huge capital appreciation in part because affluent middle-aged people have been able to purchase additional properties subsidized by the tax payer.
Meanwhile I have three adult children who have almost no hope of getting on the property ladder in London any time soon because house prices are so high. This budget measure is not going to solve the problem of lack of housing, especially affordable housing, but it may encourage some to sell properties and deter others from buying properties and, so, take some heat out of current prices.
The other side of the argument is that the allowance permitted people who are not 'wealthy' (like Joe in the example) but may have some disposable monthly cash to invest in property. A consequence of removing this allowance may result in wealthy people and businesses with available cash to mop up any property disposals with the effect that it concentrates wealth in the hands of the already wealthy.
Also, it has to be a concern to the Chancellor that the decision to allow people to invest there own pensions will see many more BTL landlords and this measure makes BTL investing a little less attractive (though still a better prospects than many annuity products).
Inappropriate advice?
As other commenters have suggested, the scenario you are describing is really a small proportion of the vendors affected. And then to suggest that some of the qualification criteria could be avoided by crafting a personal email seems to me to lack any merit. A bit like tax evasion is bad, tax avoidance is OK as long as it is not too extreme, this advice seems to me to be too extreme.
We small business owners that sell digital services have to get on this train, one the set off in 2005.Offering suggestions that seem to get perilously close to evasion doesn't seem helpful.
Another commenter suggested their services and there are others. For the digital services platform we use on www.lyquidity.com, which is Easy Digital Downloads, we created a plugin to collect the evidence required by the regulations, workout where the buyer is located and charge VAT or allow them to enter a VAT number. We make the plugin available to other users of this e-commerce platform so they can be compliant as well. And others have done the same for other platforms.
As has been commented, HMRC may take specific view on the application of VAT but view may not be shared by the tax authorities of other EU member states. Perhaps better would be a summary of the review available on the EU commission's web site.
This long document does a good job of summarizing the implications of the different articles, especially article 24 and sections a through f. However it is still a lot to take in and an intelligent review would benefit and enlighten everyone affected.
Eloquent
The ribbon is great. Sure things moved but the text, and so purpose, became more obvious. Also, often because the option then exists to do more stuff, its possible to review text formatting, table and graph styling before its applied. I'm glad Microsoft made the change.
As for Windows 8, update to Windows 8.1. It boots to the desktop. You can customize the start menu to meet your needs.
Of course if you are unwilling to change, stick with Windows XP. While it may be out of formal support, in practice Microsoft is still maintaining it from a security perspective.
Imagine the outcry
The Excel community whinged and whined about the introduction of the Ribbon which, in my view, is a much better means of navigation than menus. No so the grey beards who just didn't want to change. They knew the command sequences, where all the little feature were tucked away. Imagine, then, if Microsoft, god forbid, changed the way columns are hidden and unhidden on the iPad. Can you imagine the hue and cry about Microsoft changing the interface again? My bet is that Microsoft learned from the introduction of the Ribbon not to do things in a better way.
My brother in law is a tax [inspector?]
But they are not upping and leaving. 2.5% is a low number for staff turnover in a large organisation. And this, for HMRC, is a high number. The conclusion has to be that HMRC is much better than average place to work. Or that staff down believe they will be successful obtaining gainful employment elsewhere. Or that managers are not doing the human resource part of their job and shepparding under performers out of the door.