Member Since: 5th Mar 2002
Accountant Paul Soper
22nd Mar 2019
The wasting asset exemption only applies if capital allowances had not been claimed or, and this is the important bit, could not have been claimed but the provision also states that it must have been "used and used solely for the purposes of a trade, profession or vocation" to deny the relief - so if the instruments have ever been played for pleasure, rather than being locked in a bank vault, which some people do (!) then the exemption would still be available. Now, no-one wants to be the test case to prove whether this interpretation is correct so treat it as exempt BUT make full disclosure in the white box including s45(2)(a) and explanation that it has not been used at all as you also want to avoid (3)(a) where partial use for business purposes created a partial capital allowances entitlement... Lastly, is the client telling the truth - could there be some footage on Youtube or facebook etc which shows him using the instrument???
14th Mar 2018
It appeared as a question on a completely different thread so I wonder if it is a glitch in the AW software - here is the thread I found it on - I wondered what relevance it might have had... https://www.accountingweb.co.uk/comment/646486#comment-646486
Ah - now I see - Lg173 posed the question I responded to just now back in 2013 and someone else, in his thread on the employment issue, simply posted the link to the original discussion - has he learned much in the intervening 5 years one wonders...
14th Mar 2018
I suspect that most people here gained practical experience by working for a firm or practice for a number of years; to be honest, working as a Finance Manager, then as a Teacher, albeit a qualified one (hope you didn't teach English judging from your first sentence), even with the credits you obtained through your degree study, doesn't really seem to qualify you to advise small business unless you gain practical experience doing so, and if you had that experience I think you would be able to answer the question yourself. Make a sacrifice, get some real experience, would be my advice...
14th Mar 2018
I suppose the bog-standard answer would be a contract with a genuine substitution clause, as demonstrated in Express and Echo Publications v Tanton, but bearing in mind that in that case the driver was required to provide a substitute at his own expense entirely when unable or unwilling to perform the duties - the clause would have to be genuine and there would, ideally, be evidence of genuine substitution. That would avoid employee status but they could still be classed as workers as defined by s230 Employment Rights Act 1996 with limited rights including paid holidays and national minimum wage etc...
25th Oct 2017
How often does that happen? Owning less than 5% AND receiving a loan? It will happen occasionally but is very rare - 99% of these situations arise with a very small number of directors who own significant shareholdings... but as ever it is important to dot all of the 'i's and cross all of the t's...
22nd Oct 2017
The 10,000pound de minimis is for benefits in kind and has NOTHING to do with s455. There is no de minimis for s455 so if the loan is outstanding more more than 9 months and 1 day after the end of the CAP then there is a s455 iability regardless of the amount of the loan
22nd Oct 2017
For practical purposes you can regard the Isle of Man as part of the UK for VAT purposes. There are some differences but it is the IoM entitlement to recover not the UK/IoM obligation to account for VAT.
If your turnover is more than the current registration limit (whether your customers are UK/IoM or EU) then you should register. Sales outside the EU can be ignored as being outside the scope of EU VAT but the IoM is inside the EU and the UK for VAT purposes...
2nd Oct 2017
You can't just 'treat them as dividends' - paying a liability on behalf of an employee/director creates a liability for both tax and NIC. If you want to treat it as cancelled by a dividend then you need to create a dividend, not treat it as a dividend. Furthermore you cannot treat a payment retrospectively as if it was a dividend and create the paperwork trail that didn't exist in the first place (unless that suggestion was ironic of course!) if you did that would be fraud... sounds like a badly advised client situation here...
2nd Aug 2017
As following that link is likely to mislead you the answer is that any acquisition by a company of a residential property incurs the 3% surcharge rate, whether it is the first or subsequent purchase. I assume that the other property was acquired before the surcharge rules came in.
2nd Aug 2017
I agree - no supply hence no VAT but... make sure that there is evidence that these are indeed donations, several years down the line on a VAT inspection if there is no evidence of the nature of the receipt there will be a danger that they will be treated as consideration for supplies unless you have evidence to the contrary... perhaps it may be safer for a donation directly to the parent charity in some way by the customers?