Member Since: 6th Oct 1999
6th Sep 2019
VAT Notice 700/1
"9.1 NETP – definition
A non-established taxable person (NETP) is any person who is not normally resident in the UK, does not have a UK establishment and, in the case of a company, is not incorporated in the UK.
11.3 When HMRC can make you appoint a tax representative
HMRC can direct some NETPs to appoint a tax representative...
We cannot direct NETPs who are established in other EU member States, or who are based in countries where certain mutual assistance arrangements exist."
So, the questions are: whether there would be sufficient alternative 'mutual assistance arrangements' in place after UK leaving the EU, and, if not: whether HMRC's direction to NETPs to appoint a fiscal representative would be compulsory.
19th Aug 2019
Spoke to HMRC and got a standardised letter dated 22/7/19 confirming that the company did not need to start using MTD until 1/10/19.
Then got a standardised letter dated 15/8/19 warning that the company had missed its deadline of 7/8/19 for filing under the new MTD system.
Are they trying to operate with 2 separate databases or something? The HMRC left hand clearly doesn't know what the right hand is doing.
17th Jul 2019
17th Jul 2019
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.
15th Jul 2019
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 "
22nd May 2019
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?
14th May 2019
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.
13th May 2019
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?
13th May 2019
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?
13th May 2019
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.