As an accountant, I feel it would be remiss of me not to point out that per the information given, the amounts stolen are only sufficient to fuel a £104.29 a day gambling habit.
This seems a ridiculous ruling. We've got the outcome where the customer has paid and so reclaimed input VAT, but the VAT is never paid over to HMRC because the supplier gets the bad debt relief.
Presumably the missing part of the outcome is where, in addition to the criminal proceedings against the fraudster, HMRC also compel them to register for VAT and hand over 1/6 of their ill gotten gains.
Well it's the contractor who's ultimately responsible now, so when the subbies mess it up due to having no clue and no representation, it's now the contractor who gets pumped instead of the subbie that HMRC don't have the resources to track down. So regardless of the paperwork supplied (or not supplied), the contractor has to make sure it's right.
The motivation for this, as with the IR35 changes, seems to be to move all the responsibility for tax in problem areas to bigger enterprises that are easier to find and police, to try and help HMRC collect the tax they're ill equipped to find at the moment.
It's no secret HMRC are struggling across so many departments due to underfunding and a lack of resources.
Perhaps they could better use the resources they do have if they didn't bring spurious cases to tribunal seeking to impose disproportionate and clearly unfair judgements on taxpayers.
It should have been clear from the outset that the request to withdraw the £7K in contributions when there's £50K tax at stake was the result of a mistake and no reasonable judge would determine otherwise, so why refuse and force the appeal?
It seems like a bit of common sense would really save everyone a lot of time, money and effort.
I know when I think of the people most unfairly treated by the tax system it's those earning £125,000 a year who I can't help but pity.
You could solve the marginal rate issue you identify by dropping the point at which the clawback starts to £50,000 and having it happen at £1 for every £4 until income hits £100,000.
Love the idea of funding their cuts with the "Brexit Buffer", as though Brexit is now solved and won't actually cost anything further.
Surprising how many "thanks" I get for such exaggerated posts and how many people seem to agree with what I say. Your so rude.
* You're, not your.
I'm not a rude person, I just don't like you or anything you write under either of your accounts because it's at best hyperbolic, misleading, and in many cases factually inaccurate.
It's always simple when we know how and it's unnecessary and a grave mistake to sneer at people who don't (yet) know how.
I'm not sneering at anyone, I'm saying that the error outlined in the article is, by definition, a careless error because it's careless to use software you don't understand to file a return.
How the taxpayers and accountants deal with the problem is the biggest issue that MTD poses but the problem is not one of faulty software and the error made by the taxpayer is not a built in consequence of the new rules.
The problem is that whatever way you swing it there is a big cost to a business for complying with MTD if they don't already use compliant systems. For some the best solution will be to engage an accountant when previously this was unnecessary, for others it will be to learn new skills. Either option has a cost that is unfair on the taxpayer.
The third solution of blindly filing without the required degree of understanding or care is no solution at all and is a careless error by the taxpayer, and for that I have little sympathy. I have plenty of sympathy with regard to the necessary steps to avoid these errors though.
Show me one person endorsing MTD.
Pointing out that your terrible posts are either exaggerations or outright wrong is not the same as endorsing MTD.
If the software can't do cash accounting, then the problem is indeed with the software. That's not what happened, what happened is that the software could do it, but wasn't set up correctly. That's not a software problem, that's a user problem.