Member Since: 27th Mar 2002
8th Sep 2014
Robot and call centre
Please state clearly the nature of your enquiry
"Your enquiry is about tax rate, is this correct?"
"I'm sorry, I did not understand that response. Please state again the matter about which you wish to speak to a member of staff"
"Putting you through to a Self assessment advisor"
Beardy jazz for five minutes then, "did you know you can find the answer to many questions on the HMRC website at www.hmrc.gov.uk?"
"Exterminate, exterminate. You will answer my question!!"
Beardy jazz for five minutes then, "did you know you can find the answer to many questions on the HMRC website at www.hmrc.gov.uk?" repeat multiple times.
Robot has capacity to learn and realises the HMRC call computer has bested it, leading to logic circuit breakdown, which it cannot repair despite multiple attempts with HMRC toolkits.
7th Aug 2014
Minor technical matter -£60M shortfall in distributable reserves
I wonder if KPMG's cleaner (jobshare with Jim100 client's bookkeeper) was responsible for signing off the accounts.
21st Feb 2014
Given the declining standards in communications from HMRC, as fawltybasil2575 has found this could be genuine.
The best I have had from HMRC in the past couple of years, was a letter from a collection section. It had a number on it. When I called that number the member of staff did not know what it was about because the number for the section I was calling had changed 6 months previously. I eventually got through to the new number, in Scotland having started with Yorkshire, I commented, quite forcefully I admit, that it was wasting my time and my client's money putting the wrong number on the correspondence.
With no apology, the response was the change of telephone number was overprinted on the envelope in which the letter was sent. Still this kafkaesque moment made me realise accountants trail HMRC by a long way when it comes to "pushing the outside of the envelope". Until then it was simply another of those phrases you hear; I never realised what it meant.
12th Feb 2014
I wonder if posts like this are put in to spark this sort of reaction.
4th Feb 2014
Avoid any accountant who says, "I am proactive", or "I meet with clients". I have never understood how adding pro to active develops the latter and you meet clients. So taking Monsoon's well made pointers, such accountants fail by making the simplest langauge more complicated.
Look for someone who answers the question and offers the reasons why rather than offers the reason why then suggests an answer. As the client you are busy if you do not like the recommendation you are unlikely to go through with it, so may not want to wade through what you see as guff to find the recommendation. If you see and like the recommendation straight, you can decide if you like the suggestion; the reasons why offer support. In any event you recognise the accountant as being able to set out your options clearly.
I would add one more to Monsoon's list -
Someone who listens to you; otherwise how will they ever understand your business and your concerns?
9th Oct 2013
More than one finger to point
First, if it's post disengagement at the minimum it's unethical.
Who is to blame? The client's practices are slack if they did not at least change the passwords.
Did the ex-firm have different access rights? That would probably be the only way the bank could tell who was accessing the account; if it's shared rights how can the bank distinguish the users. If the ex-firm had separate user rights then would it not have been sensible to have the bank cancel them?
It could be that the ex-firm is not accessing the account but a member of staff in that firm is without authority.
Out of curiousity, how did the client find out. If he approached the bank, I presume he had a suspicion something was up - what triggered it. If the bank approached him, then surely the bank knew something was wrong otherwise it would not have reported it. As banks make such a song and dance about security being so important surely immediately it suspected something was wrong it should have created a denial of service.
20th Sep 2013
As much tax knowledge as my cat,
How do you know your cat is not working in an HMRC call centre when it goes out? Purrfect job to get some money in the kitty.
2nd Sep 2013
Employment and tests
If she is running about for him, arranging appointments, doing the books etc, it appears she is more likely to be an employee. HMRC look at wife's wages for actual payment rather than book entry and the payment is commensurate with the work done at market rates.
Then there are the two self employments both generating low profits. Is there anything to be gained from her self employment or a partnership? If the profits are low and then a salary creates losses are they commercial?
On the DOTA front, paying a salary for work done would not be notifiable, otherwise each P45 or P46 would entail notification.
Self employment might reduce the 40% charge or create a loss but watch for Class 2 and 4 offsetting any benefit, plus a tax return because there is self assessment.
Partnership, is it really worth it when there are two businesses. No loss possibility in either, class 2 and class 4 possible, 2 partnership returns and an extra tax return could well wipe out the benefit.
30th Aug 2013
Are you really saving anything?
How long will it take you to prepare the accounts and put them into a stautory format? What is your time worth to the business? Is your time well spent doing this or can you deliver greater value doing something else? What will any additional software cost you?
The answer to the question as the answers indicate, is yes but perhaps you have asked the wrong question.
30th Aug 2013
Some mistake surely
I understood that HMRC are looking to revise the current CIS system, (monthly returns etc.,) once the teething problems with RTI have been resolved, to allow both to run together properly.
Was it only last month HMRC was spinning us a tale of how well RTI was doing?