We've only had one set rejected - someone didn't refresh VT's auto-hide after entering the stock figure and so the balance sheet didn't add up *red face*. (Mind you, they got their own rejection letter wrong, citing the wrong figures on the balance sheet.)
Lesson learnt, but one annoying aspect was that CH, while so keen to go digital (and doing pretty well at it IMO) still insisted on the correct accounts being presented on paper. If even the tech troglodytes at HMRC allow re-submission online, why not CH?
With the 'dividend tax' (read Ee's NI) now in place the revenue 'lost' through PSCs is going to be much lower than previously anyway, so the cost/benefit calculation for HMRC pursuing these cases will be even more tenuous. As David says, just whack Er's NI on at the engager's end and be done with it.
I long came to the conclusion that it's not a Tory government, Coalition Government or Labour government that's at fault.
It's just 'government', and too much of it.
"In total this [road fund licence freeze] saves the average car driver £130 a year"
"You see", said the mugger, "I was going to clean out your wallet this time, but I'm only going to take the same as during last week's beating, so you're actually better off!"
Do they really think people still fall for this rubbish?
So in doing what parliament encouraged us to do, we are now accused of 'abusing' the scheme. [Insert unprintable comment here.]
I always thought the small 'profit' element was a share of the administrative savings that accrue to HMRC from the FRS? At least that's how I explained it to incredulous (read 'worldly-wise') clients. Now I'll just have to explain that Mr Hammond-Osborne-Brown wants to screw them over as usual.
Damn my fat fingered typign, and damn this new website!
To those who have voted "Leave"
What do you feel after knowing that the propaganda of Mr Farage to leave the EU, on which you have given your voice, was based on deceptive information?
That figure was dissected ruthlessly throughout the campaign. The Ashcroft research showed that most overs were taking it with more than a pinch of salt. the Leav.EU campaing (Farage & Co.s gang, not the official campaign) distanced themselves from it. Yet even if the post-rebate gross figure (some £270m-odd) was used, the argument would have been the same.
I can understand Remainers still being shell-shocked by all this, I really can - I have good friends among them - but this is clutching at straws.
"Some commentators estimate that this could take up to 10 years of parliamentary time to untangle."
Hmmm. So Parliament is tied up for ten years and is thus prevented from sticking their nose into ever more corners of our business?
Not seeing a down side there.
"EU should be moving towards USE (United States of Europe)"
It is that very things that forced us into Brexit. A USE is simply not necessary. Free trade stops wars, but naything mroe than that is questionable. Certainly forcing long independent countries into a political union (largely by stealth) lays the foundations for new conflicts.
I'm with you on most of that, except with Cameron's evident lacking in the skill of negotiation I'd leave him on the backbenches.