I phoned HMRC today to try to find out what was going on with these incorrect MSB registration details . Not allowed to speak to anyone on the MLR team. Can only be dealt with by the call centre operator sending an email to the MLR team to ask them to contact me in the next 15 days if I'm lucky. Losing the will to live, or at least deal with HMRC.
I am registered with HMRC as an ASP, not an MSB.
I too received the email below from HMRC on Friday.
Also, the addressee was one of my client companies who have nothing to do with MLR ! In fact all my MLR emails come mistakenly addessed to this client. I sent an email to the MLR team about this some months ago, to no effect.
Clearly Andrew Henderson has no idea what he is doing.
Dear XXX Ltd,
The services you provide as a money service business (MSB) are at high risk of being used by criminals to launder money and fund terrorist attacks.
What are your responsibilities?
The law requires you to have written policies, controls and procedures in place and ensure that your customers, employees and agents are who they say they are. Your requirements, outlined in the Money Laundering Regulations 2017, must be carried out by you and any people you employ. This is to help stop you from unwittingly becoming involved in criminal activity. Please make sure you follow the rules carefully.
As a registered MSB, all beneficial owners, officers and managers (BOOMs) of your business must pass HMRC’s Fit and Proper test. You are also responsible for ensuring that BOOMs of your agents are fit and proper.
.... etc, etc...
Customer Engagement Team
HMRC Anti Money Laundering Supervision "
I signed up and I think my records are now difficult to understand and impossible to check compared to the old system in place .
You're a professional accountant, but you can't keep your own records in a methodical way on a spreadsheet?
Yes, that's the point of the query. For a company car or a privately owned vehicle there is no need to ask all those questions because there is a convenient recognised calculation of a rate to start with, which glosses over all (or most of) those variable factors.
But throw in a simple car allowance which exactly covers the capital cost (in this case) and there is no convenient equivalent.
So 2 guys come along for a couple of £40k jobs. First guy has his own car already and the company will pay him £40k + 45p/mile to cover his business use of that car. Second guy has no car. Should he get £40k + £2k car allowance + 45p/mile? I don't think so. Shouldn't he get £40 + £2k car allowance + a lower mileage rate?
I think that's different. The other people who use their own cars that they have bought themselves would be on £40k not £42k.
Why pay this guy £42k when he could be paid £40k and an all-inclusive mileage rate instead?
It's not a tax question - I know what the tax treatment is.
In this situation the employer is definitely paying the equivalent of the capital cost of the vehicle. The company had agreed a remuneration figure with the employee and then added a grossed up figure on top of that to reimburse the employee the net monthly cost of renting the vehicle.
OK, so the answer is:
The position is not straightforward in that there is a recognised mileage rate for a company car, where only fuel is being claimed, and there is a recognised mileage rate for an employee's own car where the employer is reimbursing fuel, maintenance and capital cost, but there is no recognised mileage rate for where an employer wants to reimburse fuel and maintenance but no capital cost.
In this situation it is up for negotiation between the employer and employee what rate to use. Presumably higher than the 21p/mile for fuel only, and lower than the 45p/25p rate above which the employee would incur a tax liability.
I would think it would be quite standard for a client to ask their accountant to advise a reasonable rate for them to use in this situation. The problem is there isn't an easily accessible rate to respond with.