VAT: Letter on reverse charge for builders
You might also be interested in
Replies (48)
Please login or register to join the discussion.
Too Late! I sent my letters yesterday. What a shame, I'm sure your letter is better than mine.
I understand the reason why this is being done and completely agree that it should cut out a significant amount of VAT fraud. However, I anticipate this is to be the most problematic change I have seen. Much worse than MTD (the hardest part was setting up the agent services account). I'm not looking forward to October and the countless conversations we are going to have with builders bookkeepers (their wives) about how the rules work.
Oh dear. I’m not sure this really meets the brief of a simple explanation.
I do understand the new rules and I find that letter heavy going. If I were in practice, I would be doing something along the lines of:
Dear Bob
NEW VAT RULES FOR BUILDERS
The way you need to deal with VAT is changing for VAT-registered builders and contractors.
WHAT YOU NEED TO DO DIFFERENTLY
- if you’re not VAT registered: Nothing. (reminder – you may need to VAT register if your income for labour and materials is more than £83,000 a year)
- if you are VAT registered
---- when paying sub-contractors who are not VAT-registered – nothing
---- when buying materials – nothing
---- when paying sub-contractors who are VAT registered – new rules apply
--- when billing contractors who are VAT registered – new rules apply
NEW RULES
I’d then go on to explain the VAT accounting. I’d include an example invoice showing the reverse charge wording.
I’d also explain that this is just an admin change aimed at fraud prevention and that it doesn’t have any financial impact.
I’d also explain that this is just an admin change aimed at fraud prevention and that it doesn’t have any financial impact.
Worth warning them about the cash flow impact, though.
Oh dear. I’m not sure this really meets the brief of a simple explanation.
I do understand the new rules and I find that letter heavy going. If I were in practice, I would be doing something along the lines of:
Dear Bob
NEW VAT RULES FOR BUILDERS
The way you need to deal with VAT is changing for VAT-registered builders and contractors.WHAT YOU NEED TO DO DIFFERENTLY
- if you’re not VAT registered: Nothing. (reminder – you may need to VAT register if your income for labour and materials is more than £83,000 a year)
- if you are VAT registered
---- when paying sub-contractors who are not VAT-registered – nothing
---- when buying materials – nothing
---- when paying sub-contractors who are VAT registered – new rules apply
--- when billing contractors who are VAT registered – new rules applyNEW RULES
I’d then go on to explain the VAT accounting. I’d include an example invoice showing the reverse charge wording.
I’d also explain that this is just an admin change aimed at fraud prevention and that it doesn’t have any financial impact.
I think your punchier style is more helpful with most builder clients - cash flow considerations notwithstanding.
It's gonna be a real mess, he wrote politely.
Yes have to agree, even your dumbed down version is highly unlikely to be read by clients, they will read "new VAT rules" and put it with the rest of the crumpled up receipts they keep in the van!
It is far more likely that the way they invoice will be dictated to them by the contractor
I’d send our clients a letter but they won’t read them and will just ring to ask what it’s all about anyway so easier to just explain on the telephone!
I’d send our clients a letter but they won’t read them and will just ring to ask what it’s all about anyway so easier to just explain on the telephone!
Sure - if they get to hear about it from a bloke in the pub.
It doesn't sound like they'll be hearing about it from you.
So are you checking with all the people you wrote to that they understood your letter? A good proportion of them are likely to not even read it in the first place.
I think we need to speak to people at least about this. I will send a letter, but because most won't read it I'll need to schedule a call in addition. The letter's the easy bit.
All but one of mine have already responded.
What you need is an attention catching heading to your letter.
The key issues for the client are completely missed by this letter
These are:
1. check to see if need to switch to monthly returns to obtain VAT refunds else your cash flow will be f**ked!
2. check to see if need to switch to invoice accounting as cash accounting probably not best now as no VAT on sales to defer therefore bringing forward the claim for input VAT makes sense.
This is probably the worst piece of VAT legislation ever in terms of destroying the construction industry but one simple tweak would rectify this - make CIS gross status businesses exempt from it.
And the big problem is I have yet to find a builder who knows how to "include the value in Box 6 of your VAT return", or indeed any box.
The software issue of how to do it is actually the complicated one, and worse still your letter, while excellent, is only half of what they have to do, in the sense that they also need to amend their invoices to show the VAT amount without including it in the total. Xero has a function that comes close to doing it, Kashflow has a pair of work-runarounds, but I cant get Quickbooks to do it properly on both invoice and VAT return without double invoicing everyone, and Sage's help lines suggested solution actually breeches MTD rules.
And has anyone else noticed that the Statutory instrument bringing this in does not actually mention CIS, but applies to all construction work. It is a HMRC policy issue to only apply it to CIS work, which I know is nearly all construction work, but not actually all.
I just had a response from Xero that they are working on rolling out a solution for this, but they don’t have a timeframe for release. That potentially doesn’t leave us in a great place for complying with MTD and reverse charge... it would be nice if HMRC talked to the MTD approved software companies to ensure their timeframes are achievable before rolling out the deadline...
This has been known about for 9 months.
Eight of those have been eaten up by HMRC not coming up with the parameters.
Of course, if the software can't cope, we know whose fault it'll be. The poor old trader's.
Steve does not receive the VAT? Can you expand? Why is he not the end user?
EDIT
I confused my Steves and Mikes earlier.
How would Steve receive VAT if he's the customer ?
Am I reading this wrong?
Steve is the contractor who has the job to do on a building for the building owner.
Mike is Steve's subcontractor.
Will not Steve charge the customer Vat as he is at the end of the chain?
Steve will charge his customer VAT, yes.
But the customer is the end user. Steve won't be using it.
Thank you.... that was the part I was missing.... Steve will still have an entry for the output he will charge the building owner as well as the reverse charge....
Thank you.... that was the part I was missing.... Steve will still have an entry for the output he will charge the building owner as well as the reverse charge....
Steve will charge VAT because his supply is (more than likely) not within the CIS, so the reverse charge won't enter his thoughts.
Or shouldn't......
I do the invoicing for my client who will be affected by this, so presumably the invoice should read as follows:
-----------------------------
To the contractor
250m fencing labour only @ £8 per metre £2000.00
VAT @ 20% 400.00
Total due £2000.00
Reverse charge wording.
----------------------------
Obviously I will have checked that the contractor is not the end user. Looks like I will need to set up an excel template as my current invoicing software won't be able to cater for the reverse charge.
Am I to understand then that where my builder client is only involved in 'New Build' construction the new procedure would not apply?
If that is the case dishonest subcontractors may still be allowed to fraudulently charge VAT.
So why exclude Zero rated supplies to the end user?
Zero rated supplies aren't affected.
Not sure how you can fraudulently charge VAT at 0%. I fear you've misunderstood the rules.
'Mike must ensure that Steve is both registered for the CIS (Construction Industry Scheme) and also has a valid VAT number.'
Whilst it may be possible for my client check if the VAT no is a valid one, it doesn't mean it is genuine. Is there a way to confirm it is genuine?
'Mike must ensure that Steve is both registered for the CIS (Construction Industry Scheme) and also has a valid VAT number.'
Whilst it may be possible for my client check if the VAT no is a valid one, it doesn't mean it is genuine. Is there a way to confirm it is genuine?
http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/vies/ - it provides the name of the business if you enter a valid vat registration
There was me thinking we were about to leave the EU - but we don't have our own mechanism for checking whether UK VAT numbers are legitimate or not.
bigmuggsy is correct. Neil's letter, although accurate, is just too long and complicated for my clients.
So I'm intending to use Paul's version (hope you dont mind ... copyright etc! :)) but under New Rules I am just going to say that if they are intending to pay sub-contractors who are VAT registered or bill contractors who are VAT registered then get in touch with me before they do so.
I do their VAT returns so no problem trying to teach them what to do
If they ignore you then be it on their head but at least you have covered yourself.
I do their VAT returns so no problem trying to teach them what to do
You do their invoicing as well, then ?
Because that's where they're going to need to know on a day to day basis.
The rules will probably change umpteen times between now and the 1st October so we are not writing to affected clients until September.
Yet more crazy VAT rules.
Am I missing something here. For a temporary solution the sub contractor issues a zero rated EC invoice which will state it's subject to reverse charge. The contractor then processes the invoice as reverse charge vat
Am I missing something here. For a temporary solution the sub contractor issues a zero rated EC invoice which will state it's subject to reverse charge. The contractor then processes the invoice as reverse charge vat
Yes - the sales will go in the wrong box.
Not sure I'm all that bothered about it.
Nevertheless, here's a great example of something that would be a doddle if only we hadn't got this MTD blocks to deal with.
Hi
Just read Neil's opener and all the comments thereafter. Generally concur with most of it :-(
Just another PITA [pain in......]
Vat verficiation - Nice but what happens if we do eventually leave the EU. Why can't HMRC provide the same service for VAT reg'ns as they do for CIS. You'd never guess the Inland Revenue and C&E ever merged into HMRC! By name only it appears to me.
Builder client only does new build residential properties so Zero supply and currently files mthly Vat rtns. My query is as far as the vat reg'd subcontractor is concerned is the builder the end customer in which case charge Vat or not the end customer in which case reverse charge. I appreciate most will be already invoicing at Zero anyway.
Cashflow - As far as I can see it can only have positive affect on cashflow and as someone has already suggested for some subbies at least a change of basis and/or qtrly to mthly should be considered
Letter - We have written to our clients as yet and may well open with the simple version offered [thank you] and incoporate some of Neil's for those who fancy a more in depth version [thank you]. But like others we'll no doubt have to speak the clients as well. The good news is we submit all of said clients Vat rtns, do the book-keeping for some but as again already stated the key issue is the sales invoice changes.
Interesting times ahead, will the software companies provided in time? Like with HMRC I'm not holding my breathe
Happy days ;( ;-(
...and as someone has already suggested for some subbies at least a change of basis and/or qtrly to mthly should be considered
If there's no cash flow disadvantage, as you claim, why would they want to be changing to monthly returns ?
Previous comments were to consider the impact on cashflow which to me generally means a warning of a detrimental affect but on considering it I can only see a positive one as I wrote.
Ah, I think the penny has dropped [must be the heat] the subbies are paying Vat out but nothing coming in if all their sales are covered by the reverse charge.
BTW re Replies - I've not been on here for ages and I can't remember if it has always been like this but it's a real pain when I click on replies and you end up at the top of the listing whilst what I really want to see is the last 1 or 2 threads which is probably what i'm replying too. Is there a setting somewhere to change this?
In your example, is Steve's customer (the building owner) also VAT registered and in the CIS?
The example is about the contract between Steve and Mike.
The contract between Steve and his customer is irrelevant to that.
If I were a builder client I would be as confused as ever reading your articles. Nobody has clarified, who, under the new rules should be charging vat to the end user, the customer.
Great letter I thought on what can appear a complex area. As for the critics who say it needs dumbing down - all clients are not the same and so style and manner of communication needs tailoring. Notwithstanding, clients have short memories (and getting shorter!) and so sending something like this out rebuts the argument - "you never told me about this". The old adage tell "Tell them what you are going to tell them (telephone), tell them (letter) , then tell them what you told them (email)" can be well applied in an world when there is so much noise out there.