Member Since: 20th May 2006
11th Sep 2019
Well done to Companies House for reaching out, as they say, but surely the readership of AccountingWEB are exactly the people that already know all this. I really do hope so anyway. Have CoHo been reading the forum and made a judgement as to the quality of the questions recently ? !!
10th Sep 2019
“We will bring proper diversity into this market," said Kjaer.
First on the pair’s diversity agenda is the disparity of gender balance, which has been a sticking point for the big accounting firms. EOS plans to tackle this by “........... for a moment there I thought they were going to say they would appoint 2 male partners. But no.
2nd Sep 2019
If the experts fees were excessive, was it that they consider that she worked too slowly, that she was investigating the wrong or irrelevant avenues, or that her hourly rate was excessive?
As credibility is of paramount importance in forensic accountancy then surely it is in the public interest to know the reason, and for that matter the name. £450 or so an hour is often the going rate for a city lawyer (and then some) so a forensic accountant shouldn’t be denied the same rate, however ICAEW should really be made to justify why such an accountant was required at that rate.
For all we know she did an incredible job and charged accordingly, but the committee just didn’t like the bill or objected to her high hourly rate, in which case she ‘d be feeling more than a little disgruntled. I assume however that she got paid her full fee, but that the full cost simply wasn’t passed on to the parties.
I assume we can find greater detail in the ICAEW disciplinary notes?
30th Aug 2019
All very simple for you to say that they should become an employee, but the banks for example aren’t offering employment contracts to every single contractor at present. Some of the employment contracts that ARE on offer are for significantly less remuneration. This is the whole crux of the matter, the banks wanted the flexibility of having minimal commitments, and were happy to offer a premium for doing so, the contractors were happy to accept that premium with the associated risk of job insecurity, lack of pension, employment rights etc.
I have a few contractors at present who intend to continue contracting because either there is no employment offer at present (the banks are awaiting confirmation as to whether this is all definitely going to happen) or because the employment offer is too low so they are still better off remaining as a contractor. The contractors will just suffer a higher rate of tax than they are at present, if they’re lucky they may be able to squeeze a slightly higher fee from the end client to help soften the tax hit.
6th Aug 2019
3 years practising certificate fees alone must be £1,500, presumably didn't bother with CPD so that's at least another £1k, perhaps didn't bother with PII? What else didn't they bother with? If they weren't being supervised for MLR by ICAEW then probably didn't sign up with HMRC either? Were they doing KYC searches on clients? Have they now had a monitoring visit to ensure the quality of their files and procedures are up to standard? You don't have to be an accountant to work out that for £1,000 they've done rather nicely out of it, and a further 30% discount applied for bad behaviour, well done ICAEW.
31st Jul 2019
I do agree that there are many distractions that can impede workflow, but i’m just not personally convinced by the checking emails only once during the working day.
I would prefer to know what the clients query is, how that query is going to affect my workflow (ie how long will it take) and respond accordingly, either addressing the query immediately or telling them it will be sorted tomorrow etc.
Is it not the digital equivalent of a partner saying that their door is closed to staff and clients for the majority of the day, but by all means everyone queue up at 3pm by which time we’re 6 hours into the working day with less than 2 to go. Wouldn’t that be considered bad people/client management?
One other thought, you say you’re active on social media, presumably not during working hours though because if i’m Sending a client an auto-reply saying i’m Busy and only check emails once during working hours then they see me posting on Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, Insta etc etc then they wouldn't Be impressed.
Not knocking your approach, it clearly seems to work for you, and most probably other younger (and some older) practitioners, we all have different work environments, family and lifestyle commitments, types and number of clients, staffing, office and practice calls on our time. It’s interesting hearing the challenges that others have, and how that compares to our own, there’s quite a variety.
Definitely agree regarding the marketing emails, an unsubscribing job is certainly on the cards.
Well done for setting up a practice so young, I was 32 when I became a partner and 34 when I setup on my own. An ‘oldie’ in comparison to you.
5th Apr 2019
I sympathise with the few that are genuinely vulnerable individuals, however at some point your client (as an example) must have realised that they were working through an umbrella company and not paying any tax, then subsequently were running their own company for a number of years without paying any tax, presumably they had an accountant advising them and preparing their accounts? Even if they failed to get any professional advice from their own accountant, would they not have had the sense to seek out professional advice elsewhere, HMRC, read the papers, or even used Google or spoken to their husband/wife/family, or spoken to the council, or the agency, or any one of their colleagues that would have been in exactly the same position as themselves.
I have plenty of IT contractors, who within the same investment bank sit opposite employees, other IT contractors using PSC's, some of whom entered into loan schemes and some of whom didn't. They work together, talk amongst themselves every day, go for lunch together, go for drinks in the evening, as well as liaising with the HR department of the company, they were all fully aware of the risks and benefits, some chose to take that risk, some didn't. They all knew it was wrong (I would suggest that a social worker is far more likely to realise that it was morally wrong than an IT contractor!), but took that chance, received the financial benefit of doing so and have had numerous years to prepare themselves for the tax bill. The fact that they either invested that money into bricks and mortar, or p*ssed it up the wall, is irrelevant.
Of course HMRC were useless at handling it, that's not a surprise, but it's not a get out of jail free card for those that knowingly used the schemes.
For clarity, I've never used a scheme or offered schemes to clients, but I have obtained new clients who used such schemes, each liability has now been settled via instalments, each client had entered the schemes knowing that ultimately they would have to pay the tax but it gave them the cash-flow benefit they needed at the time.
2nd Apr 2019
Assurance Director at a Big 4 firm, salary range between £95k and £190k according to salary surveys. I don't think that 2 hours overtime a day garners much sympathy. Despite having an entire valuations team at his disposal, they weren't used. How the other half live.
21st Jan 2019
Can’t help feeling that these articles are becoming a little “have you been injured at work, suffered a slip, trip or fall, or taken out PPI”.
27th Nov 2018
She relied on a tax barrister......would be interesting to know if she received any of that advice in writing or if it was just 3rd party pub talk via the client. Any repercussions now on him?