Thanks, hard to say, but appears to be a case of founders syndrome. The dissentient dir (DD) appears to need to control the company and uses withholding information as a strategy to exercise control. eg an "error" in accounts attributed to incompetence of internal FD rather than lack of information. Accounts prepared in house as external accountants quit basically due to conduct of DD.
IMO the FD prepared materially correct accounts based on information available. Other dirs are not professionals and DD is now threatening to sue them etc which appears to have scared them into a volte face on ratifying the members resolution. (So far anyway)
Not sure why they haven't got advice from a solicitor, or removed him, (model arts) . Perhaps misplaced loyalty, inexperience again. Would have been my first call.
Any thoughts on the mems resolution to approve accts and s414 requirement? The dirs have approved, but in their capacity as mems so wonder if that has legs or its a very literal application of the law?
Thank you, I did try Andica, but they were unable to accomodate an accounting period >365 days, so couldn't do first year accounts/tax return, which as a start up I had a few.
Thanks scalloway, just to double check I've understood, HMRC will have been advised that the company has been incorporated by Companies House - same as any other company.
The bit I am unclear on is whether, in the case of a company limited by guarantee, HMRC don't send their standard CT603? I'd thought the default was a tax return is expected from all companies unless they advise HMRC they are dormant.
Is that not the case for a company limited by guarantee?
Just to (hopefully) clarify, they have lived abroad for a number of years. Last year, they moved from Singapore to Japan. They made their home in Singapore for the first part of the year and Japan for the second.
Thank you for the pointer to 24(1) on the Japan treaty.
For the Singapore treaty, the way I read Art 25 is that the PA is not available (plus W is not a Singapore national), do you agree?
(The reason I am asking is because for the previous they were resident in Singapore for 100% of the time.)
thanks again
My answers
Ahh yes of course, different tax rates on different types of income - thanks.
(who knows what till be the situation after 12 Dec)
thanks - appreciated
Thanks, hard to say, but appears to be a case of founders syndrome. The dissentient dir (DD) appears to need to control the company and uses withholding information as a strategy to exercise control. eg an "error" in accounts attributed to incompetence of internal FD rather than lack of information. Accounts prepared in house as external accountants quit basically due to conduct of DD.
IMO the FD prepared materially correct accounts based on information available. Other dirs are not professionals and DD is now threatening to sue them etc which appears to have scared them into a volte face on ratifying the members resolution. (So far anyway)
Not sure why they haven't got advice from a solicitor, or removed him, (model arts) . Perhaps misplaced loyalty, inexperience again. Would have been my first call.
Any thoughts on the mems resolution to approve accts and s414 requirement? The dirs have approved, but in their capacity as mems so wonder if that has legs or its a very literal application of the law?
(Each own 1/5th. )
Thank you, I did try Andica, but they were unable to accomodate an accounting period >365 days, so couldn't do first year accounts/tax return, which as a start up I had a few.
But maybe they've fixed that glitch by now.
thanks both - that clears it up much appreciated
Thanks scalloway, just to double check I've understood, HMRC will have been advised that the company has been incorporated by Companies House - same as any other company.
The bit I am unclear on is whether, in the case of a company limited by guarantee, HMRC don't send their standard CT603? I'd thought the default was a tax return is expected from all companies unless they advise HMRC they are dormant.
Is that not the case for a company limited by guarantee?
Just to (hopefully) clarify, they have lived abroad for a number of years. Last year, they moved from Singapore to Japan. They made their home in Singapore for the first part of the year and Japan for the second.
Thank you for the pointer to 24(1) on the Japan treaty.
For the Singapore treaty, the way I read Art 25 is that the PA is not available (plus W is not a Singapore national), do you agree?
(The reason I am asking is because for the previous they were resident in Singapore for 100% of the time.)
thanks again
Article 4, paragraph 5
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/japan-tax-treaties
and also
https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/residence-domicile-and-remittan...
thanks for your help.
thank you again, helpful!
thank you.