Member Since: 2nd Jan 2003
15th Jul 2014
I don't understand....
If the MPs are all so against HMRC having these powers, then surely they don't have to pass the law? I thought it was the Government that make laws in this country, not HMRC.
3rd Jul 2014
it won't happen
Because then the general public will realise that basic rate is only 10% less than the higher rate!
27th Jun 2014
Another one here!
21st Mar 2014
I have been looking for this too
On HMRC's website it basically says that the ATED exemptions (for property developers etc) also apply for the higher stamp duty rate, so it should be ok.
I believe ATED returns may still be required for all residential properties >£500k owned by companies (as I understand they currently are for properties >£2m), but you claim the exemption in the return - ie we will need to file annual returns for all of these companies and claim an exemptionin the return, otherwise a penalty may apply.
Higher rate for corporate bodies
From 21 March 2012 SDLT is charged at 15% on interests in residential dwellings costing more than £2 million purchased by certain non-natural persons. This broadly includes bodies corporate, for example companies, collective investment schemes and all partnerships with one or more members who are either a body corporate or a collective investment scheme. There are exclusions for companies acting in their capacity as trustees for a settlement and property developers who meet certain conditions.
19th Mar 2014
Why isn't Mr Balls making the response for the opposition?
Ah yes - because he made such a hash of it last time....
4th Mar 2014
Until they add auto enrolment on as well. Then we really will have to give up all other work.
28th Feb 2014
Ha ha ha...
I don't know whether to laugh or cry at this one. If HMRC think it is working, they have a funny idea of working.
If only we could charge them penalties whenever they get something wrong or fail to do something on time.
I spend far more time on payroll than I ever used to.
31st Jan 2014
I have a new client who can't find her UTR number. She registered for SA in plenty of time , but had to ring HMRC to ask them to tell her the UTR number again last week (20 Jan) and of course they will only post the UTR number to her. It still has not arrived. She tried calling yesterday and asking them to fax it through but they would not.
So now her return will be late and it does not look like this exemption covers her situation. I will of course appeal the inevitable penalty now they have agreed to this other extension, but as Stepurhan says, why have they given this extension now? And why does it take over 10 days for anything to arrive that they post out?
22nd Nov 2013
I referred a penalty case to the FTT
HMRC backed down once I actually referred it to the FTT. It did make me think that they knew we had a good case but they would only back down when we showed we really meant it. And of course, because they withdrew the penalty it does not show as a success by us at tribunal.
If you think you have a good case, go for it.
28th Oct 2013
Any expense payments which are not taxable should not in any way shape or form need to appear on a P11d. It causes lots of misunderstanding and unnecessary work and I do not believe it serves any useful purpose to HMRC. Taxable expenses and benefits that is of course another matter.
Payrolling? please no - at least not on a compulsory basis - this will also cause extra work for many small employers using payroll agents.