AccountingWEB
Share this content

Making Tax Digital: HMRC has a dream

23rd Sep 2016
AccountingWEB
Share this content
dream vision
iStock_Erik Khalitov_dream vision

Jennifer Adams reviews the MTD consultation documents to discover how HMRC perceives life post-MTD.

The MTD consultation documents are not an easy read. MTD: Tax administration ( which includes proposals for a revised penalty regime) is particularly difficult to follow. The reader is bombarded with 'we are doing it for the good of our customers' and 'we have been asked by our customers to do this' and it's all going to be wonderful-type statements. Much of the text is not aimed at 'customers', their agents or many other interested parties but appears to be instructions to the software houses who need to bring HMRC's 'dream' of MTD to fruition.

The basics are well known - under MTD every business owner large or small, VAT registered or not, including landlords, will submit quarterly returns (sorry...'updates) and if any are late by more than one month then penalty points will be levied. HMRC's dream is that every business will use software to record income and expenses by loading the data manually or by scanning receipts and then every quarter submit a summary of that information to HMRC.

Deadlines

No more than nine months after the accounting year end the business will be required to make a final submission, termed an 'end of year activity' report. This will confirm the previous submissions and include claims such as capital allowances, if they have not already been included in the previous submissions. So in effect there will be five 'updates' in all.

Agent free

In HMRC's dream agents will only get involved in the preparation of the final accounts.  HMRC thinks taxpayers will do the quarterly submissions themselves with agents (maybe) coming in at the end of the line or do the whole lot - bookkeeping and all.

DIY tax assessment

The taxpayer will log onto his own digital tax account where some information will already be loaded. So far this will be bank interest, P60 figs and CIS income. Later on dividends from PLCs and rental income from properties let via letting agents will be included. The taxpayer will submit the business's total figures.

HMRC's tax computer will instantly calculate the taxpayer's potential tax bill and at the same time remind the taxpayer to put some money aside for payments (which, invariably, they won't).

HMRC believes that in this way the liability won't come as such a shock when the final demand is issued. The intention is to remind ('prompt') the dates of payment at the time of submission of accounts information. In HMRC’s ideal world taxpayer's knowing their tax bill will immediately lead to accurate tax payments and the instances of late or non-payment will be reduced.

There are many issues to be decided upon from answers to the 150 questions in the consultation documents.

Here are some of them:-

Software

The main MTD consultation document does not say that spreadsheets cannot be used, they may get a reprieve as discussed here.

Taxpayers' can record business transactions as they wish but they must use software that will either be free (for basic entries -whatever that means – we don’t know yet) or purchased to submit. Submission needs to be in the format that HMRC's computers will understand. HMRC don’t want to spend their money developing software, the expertise for which is already available at the software houses, which is fair enough.

The purchased software will prompt the taxpayer into making the correct decisions about how to classify expenses, not HMRC itself. However, HMRC will be expanding their (un)helpful webchats, online guides, and YouTube videos to assist taxpayers and 'Ruth' will always be in the background.

HMRC believes that these facilities will help rather than hinder or confuse the taxpayer. As a result HMRC believes that there should be a reduction in phone calls for what they perceive are the more simple questions. Already their automated phone recording system directs callers to the (not always accurate) gov.uk website.

What will be submitted

Submissions will be of total figures only and HMRC’s intention is to use set expense headings. HMRC believes that there should be no need to retain the use of three line accounts. The tax software's ability to deliver more detail means that submission of accounting information will apparently be as easy as submitting three line accounts.

There will be no requirement to submit invoices or receipts. HMRC’s dream is of customers purchasing software sophisticated enough to scan and load invoices and receipts automatically, thereby reducing the time required for manual loading. This functionality will obviously be dependent upon the cost of the software. Many small businesses won't be able to afford the higher cost and thus the higher level functions of sophisticated software. Also, HMRC envisage the use of bank-feed software to load data directly from bank accounts into the submission.

When information will be submitted

HMRC is adamant that one month after the quarter end and nine months for the final submission is long enough to comply with the submission of accounts information. They think that taxpayers should be attending to their accounts every week anyway, so the deadline of one month will not be difficult to achieve.

In HMRC's dream each quarters' accounting information will be so accurate that minimal amendments or additions will be needed. Thus the year end submission will be a quick confirmation of the figures previously submitted.

Paying the tax

Payment dates will remain the same, meaning more deadlines for taxpayers to remember. HMRC doesn’t think that this will be a problem as they will be reminding taxpayers of deadlines when the taxpayer logs onto their account. HMRC assumes that all taxpayers will be checking their account on a regular basis.

HMRC expects to send reminders to taxpayers via text and email. In this week's Talking Points HMRC announced that when a prepopulated entry is added to the taxpayer’s digital tax account, they will receive a text at the same time.

Enquiries

One stated aim of MTD is better targeted enquiries. Enquiries will only be made into the year end submission. HMRC will have 12 months from the year end submission date to make an enquiry which will be on the final submission and not on any of the quarterly updates.

Over time the information submitted will create a picture of a taxpayer's business, which will enable more accurate comparisons with other similar businesses than are available currently. This is one of the reasons for HMRC’s dislike of three line accounts.

Conclusion

Some dreams come true and although the basic premise of MTD will become a reality, that does not mean that the detail is set in stone.

AccountingWEB will be submitting responses to the consultation documents based on members' comments but in the consultation process it is the number of submissions that will attract HMRC's attention. Even if you respond to only one or two of the questions posed in the documents then that submission will count.

It is time to show HMRC that some facets of its dream will, in fact, be unworkable and as such be fantasy. As Rebecca Cave has said, what is needed now is a call to action by all accountants.

Replies (88)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
By sparish
23rd Sep 2016 10:24

.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By RobertD
23rd Sep 2016 10:38

“A dream you dream alone is only a dream. A dream you dream together is reality.”
― John Lennon

Thanks (2)
By taxbakbristol
23rd Sep 2016 13:18

HMR&C has a dream ....We all will have a nightmare!

Thanks (13)
avatar
By cstwragby
23rd Sep 2016 15:37

This hasn't a hope in hell of working. Since April I have had numerous Self Assessment Tax Returns incorrectly "corrected" removing Class 2 NIC and also had numerous P800 Tax Repayments issued when a client is in Self Assessment and has other income on top of the PAYE!

Thanks (13)
Replying to cstwragby:
avatar
By Flustered
26th Sep 2016 12:46

Quite! I have just had my third annual telephone call to HMR&C to pointing out they have refunded, yet again, my client because they have not taken into account her s/e income. Reason - because, yet again, they have TWO UTR's for her, only one of which is linked to her PAYE, and that one they deleted after last year's telephone call.

Thanks (0)
Tornado
By Tornado
24th Sep 2016 00:25

This is a good summary of the information we already have and, as pointed out, much of this seems based on fantasy expectation than realistic results. A much more pragmatic view needs to be taken by the Government and an acceptance that much of the proposal is fantasy ... an unrealisable dream.

I still struggle to see why 1300 million pounds needs to be spent on this when the current Self Assessment system does, or can be adapted to do much of what is proposed.

Good article.

This does only relate to the way that unincorporated businesses and landlords are expected to operate MTD and raises just a few of the potential problems arising from the proposals.

We have yet to explore the wider implications of MTD such as -

a) The apparent disregard for Accounting Standards

b) The obsession of trying to deal only with taxpayers and/or trusted family members or friends. The attempt to make it difficult for Accountants and other Agents to prepare and submit records for our clients is not normal and looks to me like some juvenile backlash from one of the Architects of MTD who perhaps once had a bad incident with an Accountant. It is clear to any normal observer that Accountants and other Agents have already taken on much of the work that the Civil Service used to do and without us the system would not work at all. The same applies to MTD where the proposed sidelining of Accountants and other Agents is an absurd idea and the system will soon descend into chaos as taxpayers try to struggle with matters they neither understand nor want to understand.

c) I think there may also be Human Rights issues here. It is not reasonable to force/bully taxpayers into doing something that they cannot do and then fine them for not doing it. I would expect some representations about this before too long.

d) What will happen with formal companies of all kinds and partnerships of all kinds? Will they be forced to use a specific type of software? This will be very bad news for those hundreds of thousands of small companies that currently use a wide variety of accounting systems that produce the correct results but can in no way send information to HMRC 'at the touch of a button'. As any Accountant knows, it is a major operation to transfer records to a completely different accounting system which could involve many hours of professional help and internal staff time at a considerable cost. This is particularly galling when this will not improve the profitability of the company but will certainly cost it much and in the worst case, could disrupt trading activities to the extend that it has to cease to trade.

e) I think the Government are not coming clean about the need to use specific software. Whilst initially just summary information may be uploaded at quarterly intervals, I believe that the software will have the capability to upload every single piece of data, every transaction and every penny that passes through the business will be fed into the HMRC computer. There is absolutely NO NEED to use specific software if just summaries are required as summary information could be taken from almost any existing method of accounting and entered into an online summary template.

This insistence on using specific software is probably the biggest stumbling block to MTD as far as I am concerned and I cannot see why this is necessary in order to achieve quarterly submissions. This is an unreasonable requirement of MTD and my only conclusion is that it is the vested interests that are pushing this requirement. (MTD Consultants to HMRC, Software Houses, Data Transfer Consultants, Civil Servants and many others likely to make wads of money from this project).

As Jennifer points out, the official proposals seem to be aimed at the vested interests whilst cynically telling us that this is for our (taxpayers) benefit. No one should be fooled by that.

So Jennifer has prepared an excellent summary of the way that MTD is likely to affect those initially in the firing line but that is just the tip of the iceberg.

Thanks (42)
avatar
By NH
25th Sep 2016 12:39

"submissions will be total figures only"

So HMRC have backed away from wanting to see every single transaction?

And, therefore once a quarter total figures can be gleaned from your spreadsheets and entered into whatever digital format HMRC provide?

Thanks (3)
Replying to NH:
Tornado
By Tornado
25th Sep 2016 20:05

"So HMRC have backed away from wanting to see every single transaction?"

I think you can only assume this when the unreasonable requirement to use specific software has been dropped. Until then, I believe that all specific software will (or eventually will) have the capability of uploading all data and transactions to HMRC.

Thanks (2)
Replying to Tornado:
avatar
By Ian McTernan CTA
26th Sep 2016 11:16

I can just imagine the fun that would lead to, having dealt with HMRC enquiries for a number of years where they will pick up on something, assume something, then stick to their guns despite all evidence to the contrary..

Thanks (3)
avatar
By memyself-eye
26th Sep 2016 10:39

The more I read about MTD the madder it gets. All this will do is persuade more people to join the black economy!

Thanks (9)
Replying to memyself-eye:
avatar
By Peter-S
27th Sep 2016 16:36

memyself-eye wrote:

The more I read about MTD the madder it gets. All this will do is persuade more people to join the black economy!

I told a client yesterday about the joys awaiting down the line and he said exactly that!

Thanks (0)
Dave Chaplin
By Dave Chaplin
26th Sep 2016 10:41

Surely Government has learnt the hard way already with other failed IT projects not to try and implement this mammoth change all in one go. Small iterative steps are required to evolve the current way of working more towards this utopian automated dream. The only winners in this will be the large software consultancies hired by HMRC to try and implement this. Change request heaven!

Thanks (2)
Replying to davechaplin:
Tornado
By Tornado
26th Sep 2016 12:39

davechaplin wrote:

Surely Government has learnt the hard way already with other failed IT projects not to try and implement this mammoth change all in one go. Small iterative steps are required to evolve the current way of working more towards this utopian automated dream. The only winners in this will be the large software consultancies hired by HMRC to try and implement this. Change request heaven!

As I have pointed out elsewhere, I believe that the MTD proposals are not really designed to help improve the tax system but more to line the pockets of the vested interests. What we see as miserable failures in the past have been tremendous successes to those that have benefited from those failures. This will continue to be the case until such time as the Government start to seek advice FIRST from those of us who are better qualified to understand how tax administration works and can better advise how it should work.

Remember from your statistics courses that when recording data, a negative answer to a question may be exactly what you are looking for and can thus be regarded as a successful answer. A negative situation to us is probably a successful situation to others.

Also remember that as a general rule, where vast sums of money are being manipulated, there is bound to be corruption somewhere. If something does not look right, then often it is not right.

Thanks (2)
avatar
By adefinch
26th Sep 2016 10:58

The more I read about MTD, the more I cannot see it working.

The current system works.

Thanks (2)
avatar
By Ian McTernan CTA
26th Sep 2016 11:13

The best bit of this dream is the 'agent free' bit for quarterly submissions....as someone who does VAT quarterly for a number of very intelligent clients, dreaming that clients can get it right without their own accounts department is just fanciful.
The vast majority of my clients have little to no interest in scanning anything for accounts purposes and don't want to spend any time doing these things- which is why they employ us in the first instance.
No doubt the Treasury will produce another report like the landlords interest restrictions one which will say the costs will be minor and everyone will be happy with the new, easier system...

Thanks (4)
avatar
By Phi
26th Sep 2016 11:17

Super article, Thankyou.

I would reaffirm that is is essential for as many accountants as possible to make response to the consultation. I am planning on taking this one step further by providing a template for my clients to forward to HMRC, setting out details of why this is likely to be unworkable. If every accountant can get just 10 clients to submit such a consultation, the numbers of responses will soon get to a level which should make HMRC take notice.

Thanks (8)
avatar
By Phi
26th Sep 2016 11:17

Super article, Thankyou.

I would reaffirm that is is essential for as many accountants as possible to make response to the consultation. I am planning on taking this one step further by providing a template for my clients to forward to HMRC, setting out details of why this is likely to be unworkable. If every accountant can get just 10 clients to submit such a consultation, the numbers of responses will soon get to a level which should make HMRC take notice.

Thanks (1)
By jon_griffey
26th Sep 2016 11:21

It is clear that the requirement to use specific software will eventually result in every transaction, and possibly every scanned receipt being uploaded to HMRC, which will enable them to scan for anomalies and cross check one taxpayers deductions with another taxpayers income. That will be phase 2 once MTD has bedded in and is not being announced now because of likely political fallout.

What we do know is at present nobody has MTD compatible software so the expense to be imposed on taxpayers will be enormous. I do wonder how this is going to work for corporation tax. Anyone who has a limited company client that is part of a sizeable group - especially a foreign group will be familiar with the fact that they more often than not have to use strange intra-group bespoke accounting software. I really can't see that such companies will be forced to use Xero, Freeagent etc and so will have to adapt their bespoke systems to be MTD compliant. It is another ball-ache and a reason to ditch UK operations, which with Brexit looming is the last thing the country needs.

Thanks (5)
avatar
By Gimlet2008
26th Sep 2016 11:28

I was going to comment but Tornado has said all I was thinking of. Apart from "juvenile backlash" which is something I wish I had thought of but sums up the whole thing pretty perfectly for me.

Thanks (3)
avatar
By Ammie
26th Sep 2016 12:02

It certainly is a "dream".

Can someone explain to me and perhaps to most taxpayers how we are "customers"?

If so, will there be an end of year sale?

Thanks (2)
avatar
By petestar1969
26th Sep 2016 13:22

I approve of the level of sarcasm in the article, well done.

Making Tax Difficult, Making Tax Diabolical or whatever is a daft idea that in the main won't achieve what its expected to achieve (collecting more tax).

Thanks (3)
avatar
By aimsmarkellis
26th Sep 2016 11:56

The one other issue not mentioned anywhere is the real reason for quarterly updates, which is that HMRC want to tax everyone on quarterly profits in "real" time. nothing can be more sure of doubling the black economy, making thousands of older workers retire early and devastating the small business sector. its insane, unworkable and the biggest waste of government money since..... Hinckley Point!

Thanks (8)
avatar
By Ammie
26th Sep 2016 12:00

Perhaps HMRC could take it the whole way and insist on full details and scanned documents and to be submitted in iXBRL!!

Noooooo.............................only kidding, spare me the anguish!! Good grief, I hope I haven't started something there!

That is how ludicrous some of this is becoming.

Thanks (3)
avatar
By dgilmour51
26th Sep 2016 12:02

I reccommend Singapore.
It is welcoming of companies of all sizes.
Interaction with their tax authority is a dream.
The combination of their witholding tax + corporation tax is less than UK corporation tax - although expect 15 weeks for HMRC to give you the documentation needed to handle the witholding tax!!!
HMRC are stepwise removing, it seems, all and every reason why one would retain a UK plc.

Thanks (2)
avatar
By pauljohnston
26th Sep 2016 12:15

As I read it the final data must be with HMRC 9 months after the year end. As I see it for the majority of property investors and unincorporates and maybe LLPs this will be 31 December and 5 January.

I hope overtime is in the budget for people to answer the phones and for computer staff when HMRC's computer has gliches. After all the discussions when self-assessment was set up about not using 31 December you would have thought HMRC would have stuck with 10 Months.

Thanks (2)
avatar
By johnjenkins
26th Sep 2016 12:18

Parliament rejected the petition "out of hand" reverting to "it's going to be better for you". So they will not listen. No they aren't listening because the real reason for all this is to put the smaller business on RTI with monthly tax payments. (They already do it with subbies - CIS). The stagnation that follows will be blamed on brexit.

Thanks (3)
avatar
By raybackler
26th Sep 2016 12:24

I think MTD is going to send a Tornado through the business community. Jennifer has written a great article and Tornado has summarised the situation very well.

I can't think of a single one of my clients who will want to do the quarterly updates.

I am writing this as someone who has 50 clients or so, that are all limited companies, and all use Liberty Accounts right now. We upload bank transactions each month and hassle the clients to enter expenses quarterly in time for their VAT returns. We do, in the main, achieve this each quarter in time for the VAT deadline, but usually only with a day or two to spare.

What MTD requires is for the information we collect personally for 80 clients in self assessment to be updated by the same VAT deadline, assuming the VAT quarters are alined with the tax year (most are but several are not). We have about 10 self assessment only clients, the rest are the directors from the 50 limited companies.

The quarterly updates can't generally be done from Liberty Accounts because it is not a self assessment system, it is for our limited companies. I guess for the self employed, the data could be uploaded from Liberty Accounts, but we don't have any self employed clients. The self assessment only clients are usually property or capital gains tax related. We use Taxfiler for self assessment, so I guess this is where the uploads will be needed.

I think there is much confusion between the self employed who will be able to upload much more data and the directors of limited companies, who will really only be uploading dividends. Some of our directors also have property income and that will be required as a quarterly update.

My take on this is that our clients will definitely want us to do the quarterly updates and there will be added cost to our clients as we do additional self assessment updates into an already crowded annual schedule.

Thanks (2)
avatar
By Jamesm2705
26th Sep 2016 12:45

HMRC's "Your Charter" states the following.

"We’ll respect your wish to have someone else deal with us on your behalf, such as an accountant or a relative. To protect your privacy, we’ll only deal with them if they have been authorised to represent you, and we’ll deal with them courteously and professionally."

Yet by asking for quarterly submissions within one month of the end of each quarter they are effectively making it impossible to comply.

I have 150 or so clients, all of them keep manual records. The majority will not be able to submit figures to HMRC and most of the others will not want to. How on earth am I supposed to cope logistically. If tax payers have a right for someone to act on their behalf then surely the system has to allow time for that work to be carried out.

Thanks (6)
avatar
By dgilmour51
26th Sep 2016 12:54

I was googling up, for another purpose, 'the concept of helpfulness' and came across this which I assume relates to the HMRC website:
http://www.brunel.ac.uk/cbass/social-sciences-media-communications/anthr...

Thanks (0)
avatar
By leon0001
26th Sep 2016 13:07

And then, children, they all lived happily ever after......

This fairytale makes Grimm reading.

Thanks (1)
Morph
By kevinringer
26th Sep 2016 13:40

I've started strawling through the Making Tax Dreadful consultation. Have you read the "concessions". One is not having to account for obsolete stock. What? Stock is only ever a guestimate. Another is provision for doubtful debts. How many clients have provisions for doubtful debts. There's a concession for WIP of <12 months and accruals/prepayments of <12 months - but you still have to find the sources to identify whether they are <12 months or not. Many prepayments are for more than 12 months at the time of payment eg insurance. These "concessions" actually add another tier of rules to the tax system. A simplification would replace complex rules with simple ones.

Thanks (0)
Replying to kevinringer:
Tornado
By Tornado
26th Sep 2016 13:47

As I said in my summary, there is an apparent disregard for accounting standards. Without standards, chaos has to be the only logical result.

Thanks (1)
Morph
By kevinringer
26th Sep 2016 13:53

In the Making Tax Daft consultation documents HMRC says over 1 million business report their profits on a cash basis. Have HMRC checked the quality of the figures? I can imagine many taxpayers using the total debits from his bank statement summary as their SA expenses. The debits include personal items, loan repayments, SA payments, tax credit overpayments etc. In the taxpayer's mind these are all business expenses because they are debited to the business bank account. I've just spoken to a client who is convinced their SA payments are valid business expenses as are the childminder costs.

Thanks (1)
avatar
By andyks
26th Sep 2016 13:58

When you go to meetings with HMRC and some permanent Mtd IT staff ( not the legion of young male IT contractors ) freely admit that while they have been in post for 25 years and know nothing of accountancy and little about tax you just know the outcome.

Thanks (1)
Replying to andyks:
Tornado
By Tornado
26th Sep 2016 14:55

When you have dealt with HMRC (and previous versions) as long as I have, their is a certain despair at trying to find anyone in HMRC who actually knows what they are doing.

This is in stark contrast to 20-30 years ago when District Inspectors were true tax experts and were more than pleased to talk problems through with you to arrive at the right solution. I do yearn for those days again.

These days it seems that the only way to get a proper hearing is to go to appeal but that now seems to be cracking up as there are so many people wanting to pursue this option that the Courts cannot cope.

I am looking forward to the day when all that HMRC send to a Tribunal Hearing is a computer as that will be the only representative of HMRC that knows what the hell is going on.

Thanks (5)
avatar
By gjohndale
26th Sep 2016 14:18

This is Fantasy Island. (For those who can remember the programme)

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Ang
26th Sep 2016 15:02

As always it would be nice if HMRC could get the basic facts right. I have had 4 PAYE underpayment letters from HMRC for various clients all of which are incorrect. One client has had 2 letters regarding 2 separate allegations of underpayment, the first reply is now almost 4 months old with no acknowledgement by HMRC and on top of that they have now sent a letter saying that he has overpaid for the year 2010-11!!! which is again incorrect. I have a complaint letter waiting acknowledgment (sent over a month ago for bully boy tactics by HMRC demanding a repayment program be set up on the phone for alleged outstanding CIS payments they could not say when these happened but the computer said he owed the money so he had to pay. No time given to research even though had had not employed any subcontractors for over 2 years.

Honestly you could not make it up!!

Thank goodness I probably will have retired in the next couple of year

Digger from
Tonbridge

Thanks (1)
Replying to Ang:
Tornado
By Tornado
26th Sep 2016 16:30

'Thank goodness I probably will have retired in the next couple of year'

NOOO you cannot do that! We need everyone to man the pumps and fight this devastating fire before the country is razed to the ground.

Just kidding of course. In fact if I was not so incensed by this unnecessary project, I would be joining you. (and before the wags get hold of this I mean retiring also and not literally joining you in retirement)

Thanks (1)
avatar
By Robbas
26th Sep 2016 17:14

Have HMRC worked out that 9 months after the tax year end is New Year. Presumably HMRC will be fully staffed throughout all of December and early January and the accountancy profession will expected to give up any form of holiday break in December and January. This whole consultation proves HMRC have absolutely no idea how small business works and that the more time business spends doing admin the less profit they will make and therefore the less tax they will pay

Thanks (1)
avatar
By accountright
26th Sep 2016 17:17

Webinar last week

what a joke - I joined the HMRC webinar on this subject last week. I make quite a few comments that were ignored. Asked questions that were ignored and the questions that were answered were standard stock answers referring back to the consultation document!

The freight train is on the move and I for one am doubtful that we will be able to stop it.

Thanks (3)
Replying to accountright:
Tornado
By Tornado
26th Sep 2016 17:32

accountright wrote:

Webinar last week

what a joke - I joined the HMRC webinar on this subject last week. I make quite a few comments that were ignored. Asked questions that were ignored and the questions that were answered were standard stock answers referring back to the consultation document!

The freight train is on the move and I for one am doubtful that we will be able to stop it.

Sounds about right to me, (it must have been extremely frustrating though) but don't forget that there are ways to stop a freight train, such as changing the points to send it into a remote siding or even derailing it.

Thanks (2)
Replying to Tornado:
avatar
By accountright
26th Sep 2016 18:02

I believe somebody suggested that the MP's and House of Lords should be the first to trial MTD
I have written to my local MP to express my dismay

Thanks (1)
Replying to accountright:
Tornado
By Tornado
26th Sep 2016 18:24

"I believe somebody suggested that the MP's and House of Lords should be the first to trial MTD
I have written to my local MP to express my dismay"

Yes indeed, a truly shocking idea.

Thanks (1)
Replying to accountright:
avatar
By accountright
27th Sep 2016 09:36

Maybe we should all write to our local MP's. I have had a response from mine and he is interested and has said he will pass on my sentiments. These are the people (our MP's) that will debate and legislate the HMRC "Dream".

After all "Squeaky hinges do eventually get oiled"

Thanks (1)
Replying to accountright:
avatar
By johnjenkins
27th Sep 2016 09:57

Ah the old MP ploy eh.
Well after reading all these comments you really should know what your MP is going to come back with. Yes that's right, the standard Gauke reply which is basically "your story has touched my heart, now [***] off and leave me alone".

Thanks (1)
Replying to johnjenkins:
avatar
By accountright
27th Sep 2016 10:10

You're probably right Mr J
your response did make me smile though on a gloomy Tuesday morning.
Nothing ventured and all that!

Thanks (0)
Replying to accountright:
Jennifer Adams
By Jennifer Adams
27th Sep 2016 17:00

MP's are already well aware of the problems. In Jan 2016 some met with HMRC to discuss (make that contest) the proposals in response to the original petition and got no where. You can see them making their attempt online here:
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/115895

You can view my follow up comments in my blog:
https://www.accountingweb.co.uk/community/blogs/jaadams/mtd-mps-tried-th...

Thanks (0)
Replying to Jennifer Adams:
avatar
By darrenwilliams
28th Sep 2016 12:40

JAADAMS wrote:

MP's are already well aware of the problems. In Jan 2016 some met with HMRC to discuss (make that contest) the proposals in response to the original petition and got no where. You can see them making their attempt online here:
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/115895

You can view my follow up comments in my blog:
https://www.accountingweb.co.uk/community/blogs/jaadams/mtd-mps-tried-the...

I am sorry but HMRC staff etc are employed by us via MPs.

Therefore if really MPs wished to stop this they can easily, the rest is just lip service.

Look at my actions not my lips.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By johnjenkins
26th Sep 2016 17:23

So why don't we boycott all seminars and don't engage, then see what mess HMRC get themselves into.
They will then have to admit to wanting to destroy the small business.

Thanks (2)
avatar
By Comptable
26th Sep 2016 17:44

On many occasions during my working life I have had to explain to new staff that the purpose of the client/business is not to prepare accounting records or accounts for us to audit. Rather it is to make/sell/earn a living etc etc, with the accounts, tax returns and so on being subsidiary to the main objectives.

It seems that I have been wrong.

Will someone work out the cost of all this to the economy please.

Thanks (1)

Pages