Indeed, but in Michael Flanders' day they were honest tradesmen.
Nowadays they all seem to be apparachiks.
Today's jolly, tax return filed early November and receipted. Colleague gossiping with client who just mentioned no sign of anticipated repayment. Visit to agent portal, return noted as received but account not updated; ear scratching followed by phone call... Ah, return rejected for processing and passed for manual processing, why? No idea, scheduled for manual process in June! Seven months for a simple process!
This is now, not a difficult return, think of MTD and shudder...
Accepting that HMRC have an obligation to enforce the law I am curious as to what the public interest in this cases is.
The NHS trust is a public body: take the VAT off the NHS trust leaving them worse off, pass the VAT to The Treasury who then have to give it back to the hospital to fund medical care...
Masses of admin, no change in the underlying economics except all parties paying serious legal fees.
"It all makes work for the working man to do"
Real time information: data retrieval is very hit and miss for PAYE data and sometimes retrieves pension data as employment.
And that data is filed digitally online...
Foreign income notice: we had one of those, client totally confused until she realised the French bank current account paid interest, all €7 of it, half of which was her husband's, and he lives in France. Major international tax fraud thwarted.
As for confidence in data from those switching, looking at some of the efforts they are confident because they can't understand what they have done but it must be so because 'the computer does it'; yeah right.
Whatever they are smoking can they pass it around?
The most amazing thing is that anyone thought it a good idea to take this to the tribunal.
Turnover per the accounts completely different to the CT600 and massively less than the supposed company income banked privately.
A last desperate throw to avoid facing the inevitable?
And for these sums it won't be a cheap day out; deemed distributions? Then open up earlier years... ouch! No sympathy.
Something else to do for HMG which has a negative impact on the cost vs output equation...
In the next breath we will hear somebody official bleating about the failure of the economy to improve productivity. Perhaps those who occupy Whitehall should take a look in the mirror before posing that question.
As for £24 per employer, that is as ludicrous as other 'cost' estimates.
A small thought: Mr Harra was bleating about the length of time before a transaction gets reported to HMRC and boasts how MTD will speed this up.
So what?
What gain does shortening the time between a transaction taking place and reporting it bring? Especially when you factor in the 'in year' offsets as noted by another contributor; they might get to know about it but half a story is useless, in fact it is actively misleading.
Is this evidence of a C&E culture pervading HMRC? (Taxation on each transaction as it takes place a la VAT, customs duties etc.?
I wonder if the politicians have clocked what is happening? If the government thinks it will help its re-election prospects, 5 years from December 2019 is December 2024...just when traders have to face the reality of the changes.
No increase in income but a material tax increase: tricky sell on the doorstep!
Early election anyone?
There is a theme to this stuff which shows up all over the place. The government identifies a sin which needs addressing (we would probably agree them) but simply doesn't have or won't allocate the resources to deal with it themselves.
Solution: legislate to devolve the responsibility to some third party (see immigration/residential landlords for a worked example) and then punish the third party for failing to enforce their policy.
And the third party has to pick up the costs and inconvenience of the procedures in order to comply, all the while thinking "how and when did this become my problem?".
Delegated law enforcement with the ultimate customer meeting the cost? When I was student we made jokes about making the police self funding but I don't think we envisaged it being a reality.
My answers
Indeed, but in Michael Flanders' day they were honest tradesmen.
Nowadays they all seem to be apparachiks.
Today's jolly, tax return filed early November and receipted. Colleague gossiping with client who just mentioned no sign of anticipated repayment. Visit to agent portal, return noted as received but account not updated; ear scratching followed by phone call... Ah, return rejected for processing and passed for manual processing, why? No idea, scheduled for manual process in June! Seven months for a simple process!
This is now, not a difficult return, think of MTD and shudder...
Accepting that HMRC have an obligation to enforce the law I am curious as to what the public interest in this cases is.
The NHS trust is a public body: take the VAT off the NHS trust leaving them worse off, pass the VAT to The Treasury who then have to give it back to the hospital to fund medical care...
Masses of admin, no change in the underlying economics except all parties paying serious legal fees.
"It all makes work for the working man to do"
"Computerise, and speed up the mess":
Real time information: data retrieval is very hit and miss for PAYE data and sometimes retrieves pension data as employment.
And that data is filed digitally online...
Foreign income notice: we had one of those, client totally confused until she realised the French bank current account paid interest, all €7 of it, half of which was her husband's, and he lives in France. Major international tax fraud thwarted.
As for confidence in data from those switching, looking at some of the efforts they are confident because they can't understand what they have done but it must be so because 'the computer does it'; yeah right.
Whatever they are smoking can they pass it around?
The most amazing thing is that anyone thought it a good idea to take this to the tribunal.
Turnover per the accounts completely different to the CT600 and massively less than the supposed company income banked privately.
A last desperate throw to avoid facing the inevitable?
And for these sums it won't be a cheap day out; deemed distributions? Then open up earlier years... ouch! No sympathy.
Something else to do for HMG which has a negative impact on the cost vs output equation...
In the next breath we will hear somebody official bleating about the failure of the economy to improve productivity. Perhaps those who occupy Whitehall should take a look in the mirror before posing that question.
As for £24 per employer, that is as ludicrous as other 'cost' estimates.
Oh to have listened in on the meeting when it was decided this was a good idea...
(JFK: "Which idiot's idea is this?")
A small thought: Mr Harra was bleating about the length of time before a transaction gets reported to HMRC and boasts how MTD will speed this up.
So what?
What gain does shortening the time between a transaction taking place and reporting it bring? Especially when you factor in the 'in year' offsets as noted by another contributor; they might get to know about it but half a story is useless, in fact it is actively misleading.
Is this evidence of a C&E culture pervading HMRC? (Taxation on each transaction as it takes place a la VAT, customs duties etc.?
I gather that they sue you in small claims as your membership agreement is a contract.
I wonder if the politicians have clocked what is happening? If the government thinks it will help its re-election prospects, 5 years from December 2019 is December 2024...just when traders have to face the reality of the changes.
No increase in income but a material tax increase: tricky sell on the doorstep!
Early election anyone?
There is a theme to this stuff which shows up all over the place. The government identifies a sin which needs addressing (we would probably agree them) but simply doesn't have or won't allocate the resources to deal with it themselves.
Solution: legislate to devolve the responsibility to some third party (see immigration/residential landlords for a worked example) and then punish the third party for failing to enforce their policy.
And the third party has to pick up the costs and inconvenience of the procedures in order to comply, all the while thinking "how and when did this become my problem?".
Delegated law enforcement with the ultimate customer meeting the cost? When I was student we made jokes about making the police self funding but I don't think we envisaged it being a reality.