Member Since: 19th Jun 2009
20th Aug 2020
That's interesting, Mr awol.
Have a look "here", half way down.
"Do not lose out when considering the 24 month qualifying period
All three qualifying conditions – (1) personal company, (2) trading company or holding in a trading group, and (3) you must be officer or employee – must be met for the relevant 24 month period.
However, once you meet the personal company condition yourself and qualify for ER, any new shares you acquire will also qualify for ER (even if those newly acquired shares are not held by you for the relevant 24 month period)."
Are they right?
1st Mar 2020
Are you replying to me, or to the estimable Mr Benny?
1st Mar 2020
Do you think, perhaps, that you might be missing the point?
"What is the legal basis for the ICO's letter requiring a positive confirmation of a negative condition?"
29th Feb 2020
I don't know, but I am pretty sure those of who are not trading and have never traded are not required to write to HMRC each year to tell them we're not trading.
What is the legal basis for the ICO's letter requiring a positive confirmation of a negative condition?
And if we do not reply what do they think their enforcement options are?
27th Oct 2015
Thanks - glad to hear it's not just me!
21st Apr 2015
Seen this a few years ago ... end user went bust shortly after gig, leaving the agent, who had failed to clarify that they were the agent such that they were held to be acting as principal, with £100k of costs. They went bust too.
22nd Mar 2015
21st Mar 2015
I thought the done thing was to make it up in France, thus meeting the deadline with plenty of time to not only go on strike but also arrange for a Russian passport ...
21st Mar 2015
Out of touch.
Yes, I think they are out of touch - once upon a time those just qualified could prepare a set of accounts - and tested for in examination.
Apparently that's old fashioned.
15th Jan 2015
It's not so much the weirdness of the receipts, it's the story
Without going into too much detail, the story the expenses *tell* is the killer, where the client directors (quoted plc ...) think no one looks, don't think, or are simply so arrogant and greedy they stick anything they can down.
So once you stick all the claims together, you see who stayed where, in whose room, what they had for breakfast together, how they travelled separately to get there etc etc ...
Divorce lawyers' pandora's box. =)
And then there's the director's car filled up with petrol on the director's fuel card in one city whilst you and the director were both sitting in another city on the other side of the country. Forging a signature isn't generally a good idea.