Member Since: 22nd Jan 2010
4th Mar 2019
Using a cell reference in Excel (as opposed to copying and pasting) is considered a digital link by HMRC in accordance with their VAT Notice 700/22. Therefore, you should not conflate copying and pasting with using a cell reference which has long-term use for MTD.
Cutting and pasting is only allowed for the 12 month "soft landing" period.
This is all spelt out in HMRCs VAT Notice 700/22.
19th Jan 2019
There are loads out there.
Here is my favourite: https://123sheets.co.uk
13th Dec 2018
Rebbecca Cave, is there a time lag between linking your clients to your ASA account, and being able to set them up for MTD on your chosen software?
19th Sep 2018
I am involved in software production (spread sheet bridging software). The problem is HMRC. Their is no agent filing ability on behalf of clients even in testing phase available yet to developers. Therefore software production folk are having to sit on their hands until HMRC sort themselves out.
We are itching to go, but don't have the APIs from HMRC to set much up, and nothing that can actually be used.
Software providers are therefore just trying to get their name out there with the advertising you see, nothing is available to be used as yet.
Also, individuals are excluded from the testing phase as well as agents . Nothing at all has been released yet for open beta testing for your clients to on board either.
The only testing that is available for developers is for organisations that are filing their own VAT returns, but this is a test scenario (using made up organisations), so no one (except those in the private beta), can actually do any filing.
Personally, it seems to me that HMRC have one part-time developer at their end, working just a couple of days a week on this.
22nd Jul 2018
I'd don't recall seeing anywhere that HMRC say they are switching off their filing portal- where did that idea come from?
There are many vat registered businesses under the vat threshold that do no need to be vat mtd compliant, so I don't see them switching that off on April next year.
1st Jun 2017
I thought the new rule was that if a reimbursed expense could have previously been included in a dispensation (or was on a dispensation before), then it no longer needs to be reported on forms P11d; also that dispensations are now obsolete. All other such reimbursed expenses should continue to be put on P11ds going forward, as they were before. Now, for "one-man" companies that did their own bookkeeping, with no other person undertaking an independent review, HMRC would never had given a dispensation. On that basis, "one-man" companies would have to continue to file P11ds, even though all the company was doing was reimbursing, say travel costs, for the actual cost paid by the director. Is that not the case - "one-man" companies must still file P11ds for their travel expenses, even if all that was done was reimburse the actual cost, if no independent review is taken place - since they wouldn't have ever been able to get a dispensation, as their was no independent review? Thanks in advance for your response :-)
16th Nov 2016
It is not possible that the three weeks occupation would have been treated as PPR, as the late date, so close to the sale, shows that the property must have been put up for sale before they moved in.
Since PPR is only given is a degree of permanence is obvious, PPR would never had been given, even if the period was longer than 3 weeks, and even if it was prior to exchange of contract.
4th May 2016
I whole-heartedly agree. Practical approach is what clients want.
In my opinion, if its clearly evidenced via a suitable bank reference on the bank statement: "Daniel Dividend" and so on, then its clear what it is and to whom. We only do dividend paperwork when a dividend is paid by virtue of a directors loan account "payment". I don't see how HMRC could construe such a payment as anything else in such circumstances (assuming the dividends were legal).
11th Apr 2016
Property Development, Joint Venture, Project Specific Companies
Will this affect Joint Venture property development companies, set up for the sale of one specific development? Surely not?
Many investors in these companies, only invest capital then get a return on capital when the company is closed on the sale of the specific development. They quite often are not involved in the development themselves, but are just silent investors with a large capital introduction at risk - nothing to suggest otherwise that this should be taxed as income.
These silent investors aren't going to be clobbered with income tax instead of CGT are they?
11th Apr 2016
NIC info on employment pages - not normally necessary?
Since most people I file tax returns aren't both self employed and employed, presumably therefore I don't need to bother fill in in the NIC fields on the employment pages for such fold, and only need do so for individuals who are both employed and self employed, to help the client not over pay NICs.
I've already filed tax returns for director/shareholders who thus have a P60 but aren't self employed and Keytime allowed me to file anyway (and HMRC accepted the return) without me using the NIC fields in the employment section.