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.
Agreed about the fraction of traffic. It was probably more than 5 years ago but AWeb had at least a couple of dozen very knowledgeable contributors and the questions were genuinely not answerable using Google. It was therefore a site for professionals. There were also Swiss Toni and Bob Harper the latter of whom could easily generate a 100 post thread (before the thread was pulled!)
Today most of the questions are either from freeloaders who are too tight to pay for an accountant or from accountants (usually anonymous) who frankly shouldn't be practising i.e. the answer could be found on Google in 5 minutes.
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.
It may sound heartless but you've entered into a contract with a company that has never filed accounts which comes under the category of "caveat emptor".
I'd only part with money to a company in this situation on the basis that I could afford to lose it.
HMRC are not interested in anything that doesn't involve "easy targets" which usually means imposing computer generated penalties.
You may wish to check your engagement letter/letters. If the alleged guarantee is part of the limited company's engagement letter it's likely an invalid term simply because the contract is between the company and the accountant. As an accountant it's very difficult to get these guarantees right legally.
Only for AMLR purposes Lion. Spoke to a partner in a medium sized firm recently who was tearing his hair out because the Institute wanted them to conduct CRB checks on all the partners - they'll be wanting their shoe sizes next.
As VB has said, none of this makes sense. You are inferring that due to an incorrect refund you owed them £95.60 which amount should have been coded out by HMRC. I would speculate that you were at some point under self-assessment but have never been taken out and hence the penalties the quantum of which would be vastly understated anyway. We don't know how HMRC suddenly found your correct address but presumably via your P60s which you've been receiving since 2014. As VB has also said do not under any circumstance submit any more returns.
No problem providing they're ordinary shares. Have a read of Jones v Garnett (Arctic Systems) which took years to reach the House of Lords if I recall correctly.
My answers
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.
Agreed about the fraction of traffic. It was probably more than 5 years ago but AWeb had at least a couple of dozen very knowledgeable contributors and the questions were genuinely not answerable using Google. It was therefore a site for professionals. There were also Swiss Toni and Bob Harper the latter of whom could easily generate a 100 post thread (before the thread was pulled!)
Today most of the questions are either from freeloaders who are too tight to pay for an accountant or from accountants (usually anonymous) who frankly shouldn't be practising i.e. the answer could be found on Google in 5 minutes.
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.
It may sound heartless but you've entered into a contract with a company that has never filed accounts which comes under the category of "caveat emptor".
I'd only part with money to a company in this situation on the basis that I could afford to lose it.
HMRC are not interested in anything that doesn't involve "easy targets" which usually means imposing computer generated penalties.
I'd just write it off to experience and move on.
You may wish to check your engagement letter/letters. If the alleged guarantee is part of the limited company's engagement letter it's likely an invalid term simply because the contract is between the company and the accountant. As an accountant it's very difficult to get these guarantees right legally.
Only for AMLR purposes Lion. Spoke to a partner in a medium sized firm recently who was tearing his hair out because the Institute wanted them to conduct CRB checks on all the partners - they'll be wanting their shoe sizes next.
Thank you for reminding me of one of the reasons I jumped ship 14 years ago.
Yawn.
As VB has said, none of this makes sense. You are inferring that due to an incorrect refund you owed them £95.60 which amount should have been coded out by HMRC. I would speculate that you were at some point under self-assessment but have never been taken out and hence the penalties the quantum of which would be vastly understated anyway. We don't know how HMRC suddenly found your correct address but presumably via your P60s which you've been receiving since 2014. As VB has also said do not under any circumstance submit any more returns.
No problem providing they're ordinary shares. Have a read of Jones v Garnett (Arctic Systems) which took years to reach the House of Lords if I recall correctly.