Exactly

Couldn't agree more

I've come to accept that in spite of any perceived injustices, I will continue to turn up and do what I always do, while feeling slightly anxious. It's the Bulls fan experience, and when pro Rugby League in Bradford is less of a mess I will have earned the enjoyment and reflected glory that it will yield.

That is another downside to smaller crowds it is easier for the dreaded VATman to count them

That's not necessarily true. All joking aside the tax man can be quite
flexible. I deal with old IR staff and old Customs and Excise staff. IR staff are still lagging behind their colleagues that came from Customs in the a hole department.

It takes a while to get to the stage where they issue a WUP or they've been listening to Yorkshire radio and got excited.

Maybe we disputed paying them the VAT on admissions, on the grounds the team wasn't providing any sort of service?







I'll get me coat ... again

[code][/code]

that's my mid morning chuckle sorted

It's not that simple. Leaving aside the fact that few companies pay all collected VAT into a separate account to pay over quarterly, even if they did, what if after the event HMRC decree that something was VATable - but you didn't charge VAT?

All you can do is pay, or appeal. And usually you are demanded to pay up anyway, regardless of appeal, on the basis only if your appeal succeeds would you get a refund.

For example, if the value of your service was £100,000. You didn't charge VAT. You think you have £100,000. HMRC decides it was VATable, so you are deemed to have charged £83,333 + VAT, and to owe the VAT man £16,667.

That's OK if you have a spare £16,667 kicking around to pay pending appeal, but a problem if you haven't.

I have no clue what it is, but on the face of it, we must have a case for disputing the assessment, as I can't imagine either missing a basic VAT requirement, nor going to the expense of an appeal if there were not at least strongly arguable reasons. Unless and until we know more, you can't say whether anyone needs to be "held accountable". I don't know who does the Bulls' day to day and VAT/tax accounts.

I'm making an assumption here, but if the accounts records were up to date, factual and recorded in a professional manner, then the HMRC wouldn't need to disagree, or demand more tax to be paid.

Each couple of months sees the Bulls subject to a Winding Up Order. Each one of these Orders would have gone through a "Debt Process" prior to the issue (or indeed threat) of a Winding Up Order.

The excuses are starting to run dry for me. Mr Green keeps beating this drum about how he intends to run the club like a business. Part of running a business is managing the accounts accordingly.

I thought you just took the taxman out for a bite to eat, you all had a good laugh and then forget about the 'debt' and went home friends? Or is that just when you owe £million upon £million?

Sorry but that's patent bollox.

HMRC isn't fit for purpose, and hasn't been for years. They will gladly bankrupt some bloke with a tiny shop in a backstreet, or issue automatic fines and penalties for struggling businessmen a day late with their accounts, whilst doing illegal sweetheart deals with multinationals and allowing blatant tax fiddles to rip off the UK taxpayer, for example the use of offshore companies hiding behind LLPs. Through their lax attitude, London has become money laundering central, with whole swathes of the capital now bought through laundered funds and owned through secret offshore trusts. HMRC are a fscking disgrace.

HMRC C*O*U*L*D issue MEGA assessments to every one of those tax avoiding businesses and fscking well SHoULD but they don't. Of course, half the people in power benefit greatly from the blind eye turned to the major fiddles. I'm sure that's a pure coincidence.

That's all well and good. If you haven't paid VAT on something you should have then that is not HMRCs fault and I should imagine they work on the premise that ignorance is no defence.