Another pedantic but quite important point is that payments to a company pension scheme are usually made under a "net pay agreement" and are indeed deducted from pay before PAYE is operated, so giving them in effect relief at their marginal rate.
Hi Richard
At the risk of further pedantry, and certainly not to detract from your significant and valuable contributions to this thread, merely to add clarification for future readers...
Whilst I am in full agreement with your suggestion that company pension schemes are usually operated under a Net Payment Agreement, I trust you will forgive my clarification that reference to 'company pension schemes' is now used to refer to any pension scheme operated by an employer. Hence, the likes of NEST, are now considered by many to be an organisation's 'company pension scheme'.
The reason for my intrusion being... some of the workplace schemes are RAS, some are NPA, other providers offer both. NEST as a classic example is RAS, and is one of the main 'go to' providers... thus potentially making it a 'usual' or 'common' scheme.
Once again, I apologise for being pedantic. My aim is not to correct you per se, it is merely to provide clarification for future readers who may - wrongly - misinterpret your post (such as substituting your perfectly worded "usually", with "always").
Not a chance. This year they were on strike, closing phone lines, or on holiday (from what I remember). There was certainly nobody in the office to lock accounts!
Not sure your link enforces the point of being unregulated? Very briefly reading between the lines (and not having read up on the case), it seems to be more along the lines of the regulations in UK and AU being inconsistent?
That said, your comment about small firms is a little flawed. Small firms (including OMBs) can be a specific target for money launderers. Why would they go to KPMG (with all of the AML risk profiling tools they have at their disposal) if they can find a more naive accountant who may miss (or turn a blind eye to) the risks?
I'm not suggesting this will happen to you but, it pays to be vigilent. Some of the first questions on my CDD checklist are 'Why...' and 'How...' has the client approached me/ my firm. It's there (and high up) for a reason. A 'don't know' answer is a HUGE red flag.
I would suggest, regardless of whether you need to be supervised or not, some basic training in AML would be worth considering. Not having to be supervised is not the same as not needing the knowledge.
I'm moving to Elements with eyes wide-open (because it seems to suit my needs, and I haven't found a comparable product- only time will tell).
However, if there is a known issue, it's good to share.
I'm not complaining - at all. Bugs exist in all systems (take Horizon). If it's a 'common bug' (again, per Horizon)... knowing others are experiencing the same... and (hopefully) knowing that the provider is looking into it (contra to Horizon) provides some comfort.
I'll update if, and when, I get to the bottom of this!
I have the same issue... random pulling through of historical returns (one clients has 2014/15 and 2021/22 only).
I left it 24 hours to see if it would rectify itself but no joy.
I've now emailed support (never received an email 'welcoming' me to the support network.
If anyone from IRIS is able to comment (in here as opposed to PM) on whether this is a global issue (that is being worked on behind the scenes) or an individual issue (requiring specific action) that would be good.
A bit of guidance/ info on here may save a lot of 'support' time - given the readership - if this is a known fault (even if the response is non-commital).
I strongly suspect this issue is not specific to neanderthal and me.
Use your P45 for the SATR - this would be the case for any mid-year cessation.
You need your final payslip too. It has NI dedections (not on P45) and pension information (particularly important if the scheme is RAS, and you are a non-basic rate tax payer.
Whether you receive a P60 from your new employer or not, is somewhat irrelevant. The information - required for your SATR - relating to your ex-employer is insufficient for the return (the above, ERN, employer details etc...).
My answers
Hi Richard
At the risk of further pedantry, and certainly not to detract from your significant and valuable contributions to this thread, merely to add clarification for future readers...
Whilst I am in full agreement with your suggestion that company pension schemes are usually operated under a Net Payment Agreement, I trust you will forgive my clarification that reference to 'company pension schemes' is now used to refer to any pension scheme operated by an employer. Hence, the likes of NEST, are now considered by many to be an organisation's 'company pension scheme'.
The reason for my intrusion being... some of the workplace schemes are RAS, some are NPA, other providers offer both. NEST as a classic example is RAS, and is one of the main 'go to' providers... thus potentially making it a 'usual' or 'common' scheme.
Once again, I apologise for being pedantic. My aim is not to correct you per se, it is merely to provide clarification for future readers who may - wrongly - misinterpret your post (such as substituting your perfectly worded "usually", with "always").
Not a chance. This year they were on strike, closing phone lines, or on holiday (from what I remember). There was certainly nobody in the office to lock accounts!
Glad you're back up and running!
Every day... apart from Christmas Day when they have a day off. At least we know they weren't included in with the 4,757 festive filers!
Whatever the answer... many of these companies seem to exist as named in the OP?!
I suggest, if the real names are as stated, the post be heavily modified and redacted!
Not sure your link enforces the point of being unregulated? Very briefly reading between the lines (and not having read up on the case), it seems to be more along the lines of the regulations in UK and AU being inconsistent?
That said, your comment about small firms is a little flawed. Small firms (including OMBs) can be a specific target for money launderers. Why would they go to KPMG (with all of the AML risk profiling tools they have at their disposal) if they can find a more naive accountant who may miss (or turn a blind eye to) the risks?
I'm not suggesting this will happen to you but, it pays to be vigilent. Some of the first questions on my CDD checklist are 'Why...' and 'How...' has the client approached me/ my firm. It's there (and high up) for a reason. A 'don't know' answer is a HUGE red flag.
I would suggest, regardless of whether you need to be supervised or not, some basic training in AML would be worth considering. Not having to be supervised is not the same as not needing the knowledge.
I, for one, am not looking for sympathy.
I'm moving to Elements with eyes wide-open (because it seems to suit my needs, and I haven't found a comparable product- only time will tell).
However, if there is a known issue, it's good to share.
I'm not complaining - at all. Bugs exist in all systems (take Horizon). If it's a 'common bug' (again, per Horizon)... knowing others are experiencing the same... and (hopefully) knowing that the provider is looking into it (contra to Horizon) provides some comfort.
I'll update if, and when, I get to the bottom of this!
I have the same issue... random pulling through of historical returns (one clients has 2014/15 and 2021/22 only).
I left it 24 hours to see if it would rectify itself but no joy.
I've now emailed support (never received an email 'welcoming' me to the support network.
If anyone from IRIS is able to comment (in here as opposed to PM) on whether this is a global issue (that is being worked on behind the scenes) or an individual issue (requiring specific action) that would be good.
A bit of guidance/ info on here may save a lot of 'support' time - given the readership - if this is a known fault (even if the response is non-commital).
I strongly suspect this issue is not specific to neanderthal and me.
Thanks lion...
Yes, that's what I meant to say!
I thought the same... but, didn't want to end up down that particular rabbit hole (or holes)!
Use your P45 for the SATR - this would be the case for any mid-year cessation.
You need your final payslip too. It has NI dedections (not on P45) and pension information (particularly important if the scheme is RAS, and you are a non-basic rate tax payer.
Whether you receive a P60 from your new employer or not, is somewhat irrelevant. The information - required for your SATR - relating to your ex-employer is insufficient for the return (the above, ERN, employer details etc...).