Have reread the original excellent article and the goods news is that it may be going to the Court of Appeal. That's good news because I must admit I thought it would have to go to the Supreme Court. Anybody got any advice about what I should advise my client with one of these and how I treat his SATR?
This vehicle is a tax disaster for owners of this particular make of Combi van. VAT is reclaimable as a van but for BIK purposes it's a car (see the case of Noel Payne). Bizarrely a Vauxhall Vivaro similar vehicle is a van for both VAT and BIK.
I believe this is a case that needs testing in the highest court as it doesn't feel right.
If you search back through Aweb you'll find an article about 3 months ago.
I can see your logic (I think) but your proposed entries would involve some double counting. If you decide to create a debtor the other half of the entry would be to credit dividends and reduce the resulting dividend tax.
Personally I treat dividends as such even if I suspect they were unlawful at the time they were paid. If HMRC decided to reclassify as a loan (and I wouldn't fight that) the dividends self-assessed on the shareholder's return would be reduced.
Good question and I think the answer is "yes". They are earnings albeit no tax is due because of the SED. I do have a client that hasn't paid any tax for over 20 years for this reason but has been contributing to personal pensions net of basis rate tax and is now receiving a pension from these sources.
Couldn't agree more with Anne. Let's hope Boris isn't pressurised into changing his mind. The sooner we see the back of that supercilious, attention-seeking man the better.
No, it's not you. If you click "Start Now", click "who can use webfiling", go to the top left of the page and click "sign in", you should get back to the original sign in page which has worked fine for years.
But like HMRC, it's compulsory to change what's been working well to keep their IT people in a job.
Yes, unless the company is in the trade of making investments (banks etc.) I've prepared many CT returns with CT liabilities of a fiver or so for this reason.
I'm just grateful that reimbursed expenses don't have to be put on the P11D any more and reclaimed by the employee either on their tax return or some other way. I know most people didn't bother (including me) but at least we're not breaking the law now.
Can't really see the problem with monthly expense claims providing there are proper policies in place - if not it's tough luck on the employer.
Be careful SXGuy. You'll frighten the climate change activists with all those facts. Please stick to the script with all the unsubstantiated rhetoric from these nutters.
My answers
Have reread the original excellent article and the goods news is that it may be going to the Court of Appeal. That's good news because I must admit I thought it would have to go to the Supreme Court. Anybody got any advice about what I should advise my client with one of these and how I treat his SATR?
This vehicle is a tax disaster for owners of this particular make of Combi van. VAT is reclaimable as a van but for BIK purposes it's a car (see the case of Noel Payne). Bizarrely a Vauxhall Vivaro similar vehicle is a van for both VAT and BIK.
I believe this is a case that needs testing in the highest court as it doesn't feel right.
If you search back through Aweb you'll find an article about 3 months ago.
My first thought too - Mr Bailey's word of the year.
I can see your logic (I think) but your proposed entries would involve some double counting. If you decide to create a debtor the other half of the entry would be to credit dividends and reduce the resulting dividend tax.
Personally I treat dividends as such even if I suspect they were unlawful at the time they were paid. If HMRC decided to reclassify as a loan (and I wouldn't fight that) the dividends self-assessed on the shareholder's return would be reduced.
Good question and I think the answer is "yes". They are earnings albeit no tax is due because of the SED. I do have a client that hasn't paid any tax for over 20 years for this reason but has been contributing to personal pensions net of basis rate tax and is now receiving a pension from these sources.
Couldn't agree more with Anne. Let's hope Boris isn't pressurised into changing his mind. The sooner we see the back of that supercilious, attention-seeking man the better.
No, it's not you. If you click "Start Now", click "who can use webfiling", go to the top left of the page and click "sign in", you should get back to the original sign in page which has worked fine for years.
But like HMRC, it's compulsory to change what's been working well to keep their IT people in a job.
Yes, unless the company is in the trade of making investments (banks etc.) I've prepared many CT returns with CT liabilities of a fiver or so for this reason.
I'm just grateful that reimbursed expenses don't have to be put on the P11D any more and reclaimed by the employee either on their tax return or some other way. I know most people didn't bother (including me) but at least we're not breaking the law now.
Can't really see the problem with monthly expense claims providing there are proper policies in place - if not it's tough luck on the employer.
Be careful SXGuy. You'll frighten the climate change activists with all those facts. Please stick to the script with all the unsubstantiated rhetoric from these nutters.