Member Since: 15th Apr 2017
4th Dec 2019
Not only that, as HMRC is not pocketing some kind of profit, its a loss to the country when a company or individual gets around the system.
4th Dec 2019
Everyone knows and understands that IT contractors are usually disguised employees and that's the stance HMRC implied.
The rules should be changed and individuals and company's that are trying to escape by altering contracts or forming umbrella co's should be clamped down to end this game.
8th Aug 2019
8th Aug 2019
Hi Francois, usually I read accounting web as I find it to have quality material and information with unbiased views. Being an editor I didn't expect your review to be biased and dirtying waters for Sports Direct.
I personally believe that you should provide quality information instead of thrashing Mike Ashley.
As far as the audit goes, the big four or five are already prone to systematic failures without any doubts and I think that would be a positive light for smaller firms to take on the challenge.
Mike Ashley wouldn't be providing the ledgers to the auditors so the fact about intimidation doesn't seem to be true.
25th Mar 2019
1. HMRC has full/complete right to know the employment status.
2. Even if the employment was setup before the IR35 it does not mean that pre IR35 individuals are exempt.
3. If intentions were honest then tax should have been paid according to the status.
Most of the professionals absolutely know the fact is that it's a case falling under IR35. If no one agrees that's a different matter.
23rd Mar 2019
The Judge got it completely wrong. its a clear IR35 case and everyone knows that clearly.
1st Mar 2019
1. HMRC doesn’t have crystal ball to see what’s going on in someone’s life
2. People are usually careless and it does not mean that they should be exempt
3. The gentleman already delayed the filing and should have informed HMRC his time line of events.
4. Sleeping rough and running away from circumstances doesn’t solve the matter.
5. Sleeping rough is much much more harder than finding a job I.e cleaning plates in a restaurant. Washing cars. Just to name a few.
I don’t believe sleeping rough and just simply not having a address is a way to address the issue.
In the end by taking into account special circumstances who’s going to fill the tax gap?
14th Jan 2019
I don't think so it's worth taking the risk and fighting back with HMRC.
They don't really agree not to send in a tax return, just spoke to them over the phone.
Personally would not take the risk.
20th Jun 2018
Absolutely brilliant news.
These big four are the biggest mafia in the audit market.
There is no way that the sort of intelligent mix of people working for them cannot detect failings in the framework.
All they care about is huge bills for just reading a balance sheet.
Infact they should be completely banned and the more regulatory changes are required in the field of audit with smaller companies given a chance to work.
18th Jun 2018
Very well explained as the technical writer's explanation was completely bizarre.
Anyway, I think after reading the details there will be more record keeping and actually no significant or material improvement. I don't think it's a way to kerb lost vat, just another way for HMRC to tighten their grip on the processes.
Thanks for the breakdown.