In this scenario she is employed by the company - the company pays her wages. But the work that she does is for the individual director. The director doesn't want to set up a separate payroll.
Sorry - just to clarify - the nanny would be taxed on the cash equivalent BIK of the car based on list price, Co2 etc etc AND the director would also be taxed on the cost of actually providing the car, purchase/lease, running costs etc?
The chargeable period is Y/E 31 March 2019 - so the return should have been submitted by 30 Apr 2018 or within 30 days or 90 days of a subsequent in year trigger date.
It wasn't submitted until April 2019, in this instance more than 6 months after the due date.
Should they issue the daily penalties I will appeal.
No I don't believe his valuation is accurate. But, if it were, am I correct in saying that any proceeds would be subject to CGT, subject to AE, as opposed to Income Tax?
And there remains a danger that HMRC could reclassify any proceeds as income (if they are not satisfied with the valuation) & charge the proceeds to income tax?
Apparently, it is just a coincidence that his valuation of the open market value of the domain name is the same as the AE threshold. There is no independent valuation to support this though.
Guess this leaves us still in a pickle as to the tax treatment of the proceeds??
Agreed - it should have been completed - but he only mentioned it this week.
This begs a further question. When we get a late filing penalty - any grounds for appeal on the basis that we could not have determined his residence status for 2018/19 within 30 days of conveyance?
Thank you . S17 seems to confirm that it should be treated as being paid in the last year that he was actually employed. He won't be happy - but I guess he should have obtained professional advice when negotiating the package & the best advice at the time would have been to ensure the employment officially ended on or after 6 April 2018.
My answers
In this scenario she is employed by the company - the company pays her wages. But the work that she does is for the individual director. The director doesn't want to set up a separate payroll.
Sorry - just to clarify - the nanny would be taxed on the cash equivalent BIK of the car based on list price, Co2 etc etc AND the director would also be taxed on the cost of actually providing the car, purchase/lease, running costs etc?
Apologies - wrong date.
The chargeable period is Y/E 31 March 2019 - so the return should have been submitted by 30 Apr 2018 or within 30 days or 90 days of a subsequent in year trigger date.
It wasn't submitted until April 2019, in this instance more than 6 months after the due date.
Should they issue the daily penalties I will appeal.
D - unless he's staying overnight on a business trip.
HMRC manual BIM 376675 & 66210
No I don't believe his valuation is accurate. But, if it were, am I correct in saying that any proceeds would be subject to CGT, subject to AE, as opposed to Income Tax?
And there remains a danger that HMRC could reclassify any proceeds as income (if they are not satisfied with the valuation) & charge the proceeds to income tax?
Apparently, it is just a coincidence that his valuation of the open market value of the domain name is the same as the AE threshold. There is no independent valuation to support this though.
Guess this leaves us still in a pickle as to the tax treatment of the proceeds??
Agreed - it should have been completed - but he only mentioned it this week.
This begs a further question. When we get a late filing penalty - any grounds for appeal on the basis that we could not have determined his residence status for 2018/19 within 30 days of conveyance?
If she needs to pay for care home fees in the future the value of the property might be considered under Deprivation of Assets legislation
If she needs to pay for care home fees in the future the value of the property might be considered under Deprivation of Assets legislation
Thank you . S17 seems to confirm that it should be treated as being paid in the last year that he was actually employed. He won't be happy - but I guess he should have obtained professional advice when negotiating the package & the best advice at the time would have been to ensure the employment officially ended on or after 6 April 2018.