House selling wierd offer ...
- Thread starter britboy4321
- Start date
Deleted member 651465
Deleted member 651465
It's been a while since the last load of old ********.
Obvious answer is obvious.
Obvious answer is obvious.
This is britboy
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 27 Sep 2004
- Posts
- 25,821
- Location
- Glasgow
Thanks for the confirmation, it appears to be much as I thought so that means I've remembered more tax law than I expected to - I just can't decide whether I'm happy or not with that though...
- Joined
- 10 Dec 2008
- Posts
- 4,080
- Location
- London
bold ...
Right, so you claim to be operating via a company, yes?
yup. Some guy on here found the company name and stuff before and posted it, then got told off by a mod! You could figure out everything about me (inc. name, home address, company, and mobile) if you examined my posts here. It's all there. Start with the 'dragons den' post and work outwards ... if you can be bothered (though I wouldn't personally, I'm a dull chap!)
A company is required to pay tax 9 months after the year end, so if you are using a December year end then your most recent tax liability will have been for the year ended 31 December 2010, which would have been due on 1 October 2011.
yup
If that is the case, then your accountant will have to have filed your accounts by 30 September 2011, so the accounts should already be closed,
Yup, not going to pay the company house. I had to pay corporation tax at the end of September - September is always tough and I've used my 'change of tax year' alreadyunless they're going to be filed late and you're going to pay the Companies House penalty.
If you're talking about accounts for 2011, then those obviously won't be closed yet, but if that's the case then you won't have been required to pay any tax yet, as that won't be due until 1 October 2012, unless you are a large company and subject to quarterly instalment payments,
My next corporation tax is September 2012 I think
but frankly I find that so laughably improbable that I'm not even going to entertain the notion any further, though I will note that paying artificially low quarterly instalment payments in an attempt to defer your payment is a criminal offence. I pay it yearly
Or maybe you're actually self employed?
No I have a limited company. Though I still describe myself as self-employed as I am the only employee at the moment .. I'm certainly not a sole trader ... ( > £50,000 per annum)
If that's the case, then you don't have a company, you have a sole trader business. Under self assessment, you pay your tax in two instalments - one by 31 January during the tax year in question and one by 31 July in the following tax year. There is then a top up payment on the following 31 January (along with the instalment for the next year) to make up any difference between what you've paid to date and what your tax return, which you'll be filing by that 31 January, shows. For a given fiscal year, your taxable profits are those for the accounting period ended within that fiscal year.
Ok. But I'm a limited company
So, we're probably talking about the year ended 5 April 2011. Your taxable trading profits for the period would be those for the year ended 31 December 2010. You would have paid instalment payments on 31 January 2011 and 31 July 2011, each being half of your prior year tax liability, unless there was good reason to expect they'd be markedly lower than that, though again note that claiming they will be lower when you know they won't be is again a criminal offence. In any case, the instalments of tax that you are paying for the profits for the year ended 31 December 2010 bear no relation to the accounts for the year ended 31 December 2010 as they are based on your total tax charge for the year ended 5 April 2010, which is based on your accounts for the year ended 31 December 2009. Your accounts for the year ended 31 December 2010 don't need to be filed with HMRC until 31 January 2012, sure, but given that HMRC won't even be seeing your accounts until that point, there is zero benefit in your accountant cooking the books for you. In any case, any self assessment income tax that you will have been paying recently will bear no relation whatsoever to any accounts for the year ended 31 December 2011, which appear to be the ones that you are intending on being glowing so that you can get a stupendous mortgage.
no, I'm a limited company
In short, I think you're making this up as you go along. The alternative is that your accountant is taking you for a ride charging you for cooking the books to "keep your tax instalments low". I don't know which is more likely or more amusing.
Last year I took some time out. the books were easy to make not look so good (I bought a load of computer stuff as well which drove the profits down). Although the mortgage companies want to know 3 years profits they only need proof of the last years so I'll just say 'About the same' for the the preceeding two and it will be fine. It is law that you have to have an accountant with a ltd company so I have no option but to choose one the one I chose is priced competitively .. I get one quite cheap. So neither making it up as I go, or anyone 'cooking any books' ... just normal accountancy and some playing with money to reduce tax liability (inc. transfering thousands to my business account for 1 day at the end of each year to 'pay back director's loan' -- then take it out again the next day which is always a bit bizarre .. er ... sorry to disappoint .. I don't lie on these forums .. I never have! When people say I MUST be lying I always get the biggest LOL of all
Last edited:
- Joined
- 10 Dec 2008
- Posts
- 4,080
- Location
- London
Whatever I say you'll scream 'liar' -- so just go on to jobserve.com, look for test manager in 'the city' .. CONTRACT not permy ..
That's the ballpark ..
Well, it doesn't make any sense that your accountant would attempt to make the books look good to reduce your CT liability, because you don't have to file anything with HMRC at the 9 month 1 day date, you just have to pay. You could pay nothing and HMRC wouldn't be any the wiser. Then you file your return by December 2011, at which time they see your final accounts, which are presumably then uncooked, unless you want to get in trouble for a deliberate and concealed error, and you pay the actual tax due, plus interest... So you haven't gained anything besides "borrowing" money from HMRC.
Last edited:
Hmm but.... YOU are not a limited company- a Ltd is a separate legal entity (I should know, I own one too).
I would have thought the mortgage co. would only be interested in the salary or dividends you draw from the company- not the solvency of the company itself.
This doesn't really make sense as far as I can see..... Or have I missed something here?
I would have thought the mortgage co. would only be interested in the salary or dividends you draw from the company- not the solvency of the company itself.
This doesn't really make sense as far as I can see..... Or have I missed something here?
Last edited:
- Joined
- 10 Dec 2008
- Posts
- 4,080
- Location
- London
Well the absolute truth is I don't know what on earth the accountant does.
But he says 'If the mortgage company wants to see the 'last' formal books, yer gonna get your mortgage refused. If you can stall them until I do the next set at the end of December, I can give you a profit of £xxxxx so you'll get the dosh you need'.
I'm no accountant .. sounds like you know more than me .. but I'm not actually lying about any of this
BES -- the mortgage company ONLY wanted to know the profit. They didn't give a flying monkeys about ANYTHING ELSE. The mortgage company knows my ENTIRE PERSONAL FINANCIAL STATE for the last 8 years .. as I have my last mortgage with them. THEY DON'T GIVE A MONKEYS ... 'TELL US ABOUT the last 3 years of your BUSINESS PROFITS - nothing else -- everything else is immaterial'!!
Last edited:
You know he might be telling the truth, he hasn't lied in every thread.
The dragons den one was him because there was another thread with a photo of him (at a football game?) Same guy.
I would go back to your accountant and make everything clear to avoid miscommunication.
The dragons den one was him because there was another thread with a photo of him (at a football game?) Same guy.
I would go back to your accountant and make everything clear to avoid miscommunication.
- Joined
- 10 Dec 2008
- Posts
- 4,080
- Location
- London
It's only little me. No boss. No underlings ...
Dunno .. Saying 'I am a director of a limited company' followed by the follow up upon questionning 'It's only little ol' me' ---- makes me sound like a bit of a tw&t for saying the first sentence. Better cut to the chase and say 'I'm self-employed'. If that's technically wrong as I have a company .. well, saying 'I'm a posh old company director don't you know' is so misleading I personally much prefer the humble 'I'm self employed' as a description ...
So unless the books have been cooked for the past 3 years, you are going to present the profits as being quite lumpy- not really what the bank wants to see- surely? Just because you post a good profit in 6 months time, surely they will look at the past 3 years and query it further and you'll have to answer some tough questions
i.e. I would at least want to know if some exceptional had caused a surge in the latest figures, or is the business really sound enough for me to lend a shedload of cash to this person on the basis they can afford to pay it back from their divis/ salary from company X over a number of years which has had 2 bad years and one blinder?
Never heard such rubbish. Just refer to yourself as 'Director and majority (or sole) shareholder'. That's what I do. I don't say I am self employed because I am not (technically).
edit: Admittedly in a social context it is a bit different and I don't refer to myself as 'A director' (Normally say I own a small business), but if I was applying for a mortgage I would do the above.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 10 Dec 2008
- Posts
- 4,080
- Location
- London
If I was at a party and talking to a window cleaner with a ltd company and he described himself as a 'Director and majority share holder of WindowSuperclean ltd.com' -- When I found out it was just him with a mop and a bucket I'd think he was trying to big himself up and a bit of a n0b. Just saying 'Self employed' (the reality for all but tax purposes) is a lot more humble a description therefore someone I'd like better ... it's hard to put into words really.. basically would you describe to a girl you're trying to pull yourself as a 'director and majority shareholder of a company .. er .. but there's 1 of me.'? If so .. she'd be like 'WTF' and go talk to someone else!! 'Self employed' is a lot more 'I'm a normal bloke' talk!!
As I said .. hard to put in words .. but I prefer just saying 'self employed'
i bet you were , your as bad as the BS story teller character in "the inbetweeners"
