Apart from being a huge admin foul up and which will produce vastly increased 'errors' (see MTD for VAT for the worked example), it might produce the hugest own goal for HMRC.
How many of our less sophicated clients (not a jibe) don't clock their tax position as they go along and then get shocked by the outcome when it is too late to do anything?
Brief them earlier and van purchases, IT spend etc suddenly takes off leading to a smaller bill!
If the offshore tax initiatives are anything to go by, the £2bn is excessive by a factor of 10 and we all know the cost estimate is a joke.
This isn't going to turn out as the evidence given suggested and those giving it should be held to account when it doesn't.
The consequences of this go way beyond just adding the extra months less overlap.
We will taking current levels of profit, deducting overlap from 1997 (another life) and putting this against one year's reliefs, allowances etc.:
Non-taxpayers paying tax
Basic rate people finding the excess pushed into higher rates
Withdrawal of personal allowances
Restriction of pension contributions
The list goes on.
There will be some very grumpy taxpayers out there.
Can they find the extra tax having budgeted the same as usual? The angst over extra accountancy fees...
And all this just before Bozo is looking to get re-elected...
I have a friend who worked for v large technology company who desperately tried to get a roll through tolling contract so that they would be the incument technology when road pricing started. Their analysis was that the Treasury is a road fuel tax junkie and would need to replace fuel duty to feed their habit.
As for the VAT on charging an electric car, the culture set by HMRC's micro analysis of definitions beyond the absurd explains why, when there is something claimable (R&D, SEISS), taxpayers do exactly the same!
Morality becomes irrelevant, is it within the rule? If you tuck people up they are likely to respond in the same way.
Another fallacy of accelerated tax payments is that it increases tax 'income'.
No it doesn't, it generates a one-off cash injection and then government cashflow reverts back to the previous level.
The trouble is the government is tax junkie, give them an extra 'fix' and they need the supply to be permanent; that means tax increases.
£262K for an organisation the size and complexity of HMRC? They must spend more on coffee and biscuits than that!
Non-payment: they sue you under contract as you accepted the t&c as part of your membership.
Online tax account? I don't think I have one never mind the clients. And if the clients are all on furlough who is going to open the post to get the codes so payroll clients can be set up.
It looks like the 'spinning' is already starting to restrict the scheme. Someone has briefed the press that the CJRS is going to cost five times the initial estimate according to an item on the radio this morning.
The announcement is massively better than nothing but if someone is running a proper 'firm' the issue is cashflow. Customers/clients are stood down and loathe to commit, work coming in has dried up but the rent needs to be paid etc. You can furlough the staff and even if you start with cash in the bank how long will it last? Drawings may only be a modest part of cash outgoings.
As for the £50k, one client does events, did OK last year so doesn't qualify for a bung but his formerly full diary is now empty. Universal Credit...
If memory serves the coup attempt was 'conduct likely to bring the institute into disrepute'. It was reported in Accountancy Age (Taking Stock page on the back) that throughout his career he had just carried on paying his subscription and nobody had noticed; at least until the highjack!
And all this time everyone is fully occupied 'managing change' nobody has any time to deliver product to the paying customer.
In the next breath some government wonk is banging on about the poor growth in GDP; anybody in government bright enough to figure they are the partly responsible?