With all due respect Alison, what you're saying is (I think) that the FA's are preparing the tax returns but may not have the knowledge (or more importantly the experience) to be satisfied that they haven't missed something.
Any tax planning will invariably by definition relate to the products that they are hoping to sell. Tax planning is in my opinion something that should be done by accountants.
If as a result it requires one of your FA's products they either recommend the client in your direction or if they have the authority do it themselves.
Sorry to be so harsh but your FA's seem to want to have their cake and eat it.
Whether it's commuting or not will likely depend upon the "predictability" of his journeys. If he goes to the same clients on the same day each week it's probably commuting. Only you can find out if that's the case.
I'd certainly be trying to make a case for full deductibility.
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.
My answers
At least he's stopped his old habit of being the first to reply to himself.
With all due respect Alison, what you're saying is (I think) that the FA's are preparing the tax returns but may not have the knowledge (or more importantly the experience) to be satisfied that they haven't missed something.
Any tax planning will invariably by definition relate to the products that they are hoping to sell. Tax planning is in my opinion something that should be done by accountants.
If as a result it requires one of your FA's products they either recommend the client in your direction or if they have the authority do it themselves.
Sorry to be so harsh but your FA's seem to want to have their cake and eat it.
If filing a TR1 form is a reserved legal activity then I've broken the law.
Whether it's commuting or not will likely depend upon the "predictability" of his journeys. If he goes to the same clients on the same day each week it's probably commuting. Only you can find out if that's the case.
I'd certainly be trying to make a case for full deductibility.
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.