It's a little odd - normally if a client's UTR has been used fraudulently to claim a rebate they will call you and also arrange to set up a new UTR. We've had to chase a number of refunds recently and haven't been asked once to get the client to call so it seems to be the exception, rather than a new rule. Suggest get client to call on this occasion and ask for their feedback. If however it's HMRC trying to remove agents from the loop, as we've seen with lots of other things, I'd be inclined to ask to make a complaint whilst on the phone - this inevitably leads the call handler to put you through to someone higher up so you might get more answers!
It appears that you currently do offer some framing through your Limited Company (as otherwise, why the question about recharging) so my two pennerth is no, it's going to be very difficult to say they are sufficiently independent.
Hmmm, that doesn't sound right! Without a UTR, he wouldn't be able to suffer 20% but instead his contractor would be told to withhold 30%. And not all subbies are due tax rebates, especially not since NIC went up to 9%. Ask him for his tax deduction certificates - they should have the UTR on them.
We changed to CCH about a year ago (having been with iris for about 9 years prior to that). It's been a huge improvement on iris, much more user friendly and a fair bit cheaper too, and the support is better. There are a few faults, but i think you get that with any software system. The integration is great, the reporting excellent and the workflows are a better practice management tool than Iris' offering. I think it probably depends on practice size too though - we are a firm of 20 with about 1200 clients; if we were smaller I think we'd struggle with the cost justification.
But it isn't really to do with what you did or didn't do. HMRC must have issued him with a Notice to file a Tax Return for 2017/2018 - and it appears he's simply ignored that. They will have then issued him with a £100 Late Filing Penalty - and it appears he ignored that too! And so on - so if he has continually ignored notices from HMRC, he has no hope of appeal whatsoever. There are tons of cases on the tribunal website where you can verify this. However, the only hope I would say he has is if he changed address, updated HMRC but they still sent post to old address. But i'm guessing you've already explored that? Proportionality has been consistently tested at tribunal and is not a reason for appeal and fails every time due to precedent set at UT.
RSUs don't receive the tax efficient treatment that other share option schemes do so they are taxed through PAYE when they vest - this means that all the relevant figures will be in your P60 and you just therefore enter those details. The only other entries you'd need to make would be when you sell the vested stock. That means that you (er, I mean your client lol), don't need to worry about any additional entries.
My answers
It's a little odd - normally if a client's UTR has been used fraudulently to claim a rebate they will call you and also arrange to set up a new UTR. We've had to chase a number of refunds recently and haven't been asked once to get the client to call so it seems to be the exception, rather than a new rule. Suggest get client to call on this occasion and ask for their feedback. If however it's HMRC trying to remove agents from the loop, as we've seen with lots of other things, I'd be inclined to ask to make a complaint whilst on the phone - this inevitably leads the call handler to put you through to someone higher up so you might get more answers!
It appears that you currently do offer some framing through your Limited Company (as otherwise, why the question about recharging) so my two pennerth is no, it's going to be very difficult to say they are sufficiently independent.
Hmmm, that doesn't sound right! Without a UTR, he wouldn't be able to suffer 20% but instead his contractor would be told to withhold 30%. And not all subbies are due tax rebates, especially not since NIC went up to 9%. Ask him for his tax deduction certificates - they should have the UTR on them.
Brilliant! That made me spit my brew out!
We changed to CCH about a year ago (having been with iris for about 9 years prior to that). It's been a huge improvement on iris, much more user friendly and a fair bit cheaper too, and the support is better. There are a few faults, but i think you get that with any software system. The integration is great, the reporting excellent and the workflows are a better practice management tool than Iris' offering. I think it probably depends on practice size too though - we are a firm of 20 with about 1200 clients; if we were smaller I think we'd struggle with the cost justification.
Thank you! Will go and have a look :-)
But it isn't really to do with what you did or didn't do. HMRC must have issued him with a Notice to file a Tax Return for 2017/2018 - and it appears he's simply ignored that. They will have then issued him with a £100 Late Filing Penalty - and it appears he ignored that too! And so on - so if he has continually ignored notices from HMRC, he has no hope of appeal whatsoever. There are tons of cases on the tribunal website where you can verify this. However, the only hope I would say he has is if he changed address, updated HMRC but they still sent post to old address. But i'm guessing you've already explored that? Proportionality has been consistently tested at tribunal and is not a reason for appeal and fails every time due to precedent set at UT.
The government guidance is quite clear for offices - https://www.gov.uk/guidance/working-safely-during-coronavirus-covid-19/o...
Meetings should continue to be minimised and held remotely as far as possible.
RSUs don't receive the tax efficient treatment that other share option schemes do so they are taxed through PAYE when they vest - this means that all the relevant figures will be in your P60 and you just therefore enter those details. The only other entries you'd need to make would be when you sell the vested stock. That means that you (er, I mean your client lol), don't need to worry about any additional entries.
Pretty certain that'd be fraudulent!