Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 27, 2019 6:37:50 GMT
Just a shorthand version of what Tony said, as quoted. I can’t see how CRT are losing money as a result of charging VAT (rightly or wrongly). The VAT CRT charge us goes to HMRC. What’s it got to do with input VAT (i.e VAT which CRT pay and claim back when buying stuff)?
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on May 27, 2019 8:23:38 GMT
Just a shorthand version of what Tony said, as quoted. I can’t see how CRT are losing money as a result of charging VAT (rightly or wrongly). The VAT CRT charge us goes to HMRC. What’s it got to do with input VAT (i.e VAT which CRT pay and claim back when buying stuff)? The way VAT works is that the VAT-registered entity forwards to HMRC all of the VAT it has collected over the charging period ( three months) minus all of the VAT it has paid out. There can neither have been advantage nor disadvantage to CRT in applying VAT incorrectly.
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on May 27, 2019 8:43:09 GMT
Just a shorthand version of what Tony said, as quoted. . . . . . . The VAT CRT charge us goes to HMRC. . . . . . . Not if they've shelled out more in Input Tax than they've collected in Output Tax during the same accounting period, . . and with the extent to which C&RT rely on and use outside contractors, that will be as certain as night follows day.
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on May 27, 2019 8:45:16 GMT
I can’t see how CRT are losing money as a result of charging VAT (rightly or wrongly). The VAT CRT charge us goes to HMRC. What’s it got to do with input VAT (i.e VAT which CRT pay and claim back when buying stuff)? The way VAT works is that the VAT-registered entity forwards to HMRC all of the VAT it has collected over the charging period ( three months) minus all of the VAT it has paid out. There can neither have been advantage nor disadvantage to CRT in applying VAT incorrectly. Rubbish !
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 27, 2019 9:04:16 GMT
The way VAT works is that the VAT-registered entity forwards to HMRC all of the VAT it has collected over the charging period ( three months) minus all of the VAT it has paid out. There can neither have been advantage nor disadvantage to CRT in applying VAT incorrectly. Rubbish ! Perhaps an example with numbers might help? I still don’t get your argument TBH Tony. Obviously Nigel does, so I must be thick?! More importantly, if you genuinely believe CRT shouldn’t be charging VAT then why not tell them. Then maybe they will explain why they charge VAT.
|
|
philjw
Junior Member
Posts: 11
|
Post by philjw on May 27, 2019 9:07:29 GMT
. . . . . . The VAT CRT charge us goes to HMRC. . . . . . . Not if they've shelled out more in Input Tax than they've collected in Output Tax during the same accounting period, . . and with the extent to which C&RT rely on and use outside contractors, that will be as certain as night follows day. You need to understand that not everyone who is VAT registered can claim back all the VAT they have paid out as input tax. That is only the case where all of the sales of the organisation are "taxable" at standard, reduced or zero rate. Some services are "Exempt" from VAT. If you only make exempt supplies you cannot claim any of the VAT you have paid out as input tax. If you have make some taxable and some exempt supplies then the amount you can claim as input tax is restricted to that part which relates to taxable supplies. It is usually pro rated so if 50% of your sales are taxable you can claim back 50% of VAT paid out on general overheads.( If you can directly attribute the VAT paid on goods and services used to make taxable supplies you can have all of that bit as input tax). It follows then that increasing the taxable percentage of outputs increases the amount which can be claimed as input tax. For organisations such as banks a tiny increase in taxable outputs makes a huge difference.
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on May 27, 2019 9:31:48 GMT
Not if they've shelled out more in Input Tax than they've collected in Output Tax during the same accounting period, . . and with the extent to which C&RT rely on and use outside contractors, that will be as certain as night follows day. You need to understand that not everyone who is VAT registered can claim back all the VAT they have paid out as input tax. That is only the case where all of the sales of the organisation are "taxable" at standard, reduced or zero rate. Some services are "Exempt" from VAT. If you only make exempt supplies you cannot claim any of the VAT you have paid out as input tax. If you have make some taxable and some exempt supplies then the amount you can claim as input tax is restricted to that part which relates to taxable supplies. It is usually pro rated so if 50% of your sales are taxable you can claim back 50% of VAT paid out on general overheads.( If you can directly attribute the VAT paid on goods and services used to make taxable supplies you can have all of that bit as input tax). It follows then that increasing the taxable percentage of outputs increases the amount which can be claimed as input tax. For organisations such as banks a tiny increase in taxable outputs makes a huge difference. As I said earlier, this thread is not about the minutiae of VAT accounting. The real concern is that C&RT are misrepresenting and slapping standard rate VAT on boat registration simply to lend credibility to their lies about a mandatory registration certificate being a 'Licence' to use or keep a boat on a 'river waterway', and consequently being something which is in their gift to grant or to refuse. The inescapable, and for C&RT the very uncomfortable truth, is that their years of lying and dishonesty have left them owing a refund of every penny of VAT that they've charged on every phony 'Rivers only Licence' they've ever issued.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on May 27, 2019 21:20:30 GMT
The way VAT works is that the VAT-registered entity forwards to HMRC all of the VAT it has collected over the charging period ( three months) minus all of the VAT it has paid out. There can neither have been advantage nor disadvantage to CRT in applying VAT incorrectly. Rubbish ! I'm just amazed that a Commercial Vessel Operators & Marine Engineers doesn't turn over £85,000 a year and have to be VAT registered, because if it did and it was then the proprietor would understand how VAT works.
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on May 28, 2019 7:56:37 GMT
I'm just amazed that a Commercial Vessel Operators & Marine Engineers doesn't turn over £85,000 a year and have to be VAT registered, because if it did and it was then the proprietor would understand how VAT works. Well, . . from my point of view, I'm not in the least bit surprised by a failed road haulage contractor who only thinks he understands how VAT accounting works !
|
|
|
Post by Jim on May 28, 2019 10:34:36 GMT
Fight Fight Fight! My long departed mother would have banged your heads together.
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on May 28, 2019 17:11:48 GMT
. . . . . . . . . if you genuinely believe CRT shouldn’t be charging VAT then why not tell them . . . C&RT are quite in order in charging (output) VAT on boat Licences, which comes under the heading of VAT on services, such as the permissive use of waterways and the facilities that come with that use, and I've never raised any objection to them doing that. Slapping VAT on registration fees, however, is an entirely different matter, and something they should NOT be doing. A registration fee is precisely what it says it is - a fee for making an entry in a register - and in this instance, called for under statute purely for boat identification purposes and NOTHING else. Hardly something which can be described as a "service'', . . . is it ?
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on May 28, 2019 17:16:37 GMT
Fight Fight Fight! My long departed mother would have banged your heads together. I would have provided an axe and a chainsaw.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 28, 2019 17:17:06 GMT
. . . . . . . . . if you genuinely believe CRT shouldn’t be charging VAT then why not tell them . . . ...Slapping VAT on registration fees, however, is an entirely different matter, That’s what I meant. So have you told them? A chartered accountant has told me that CRT may be offsetting some of the VAT due to their ‘Charity’ status but you’ll need to check that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 28, 2019 18:15:12 GMT
"...but you’ll need to check that..."
And there lies the crux of the matter. If you want an authoritative opinion on which to hang a legal challenge it'll costya, to say nothing of the legal action itself.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 28, 2019 18:30:05 GMT
"...but you’ll need to check that..." And there lies the crux of the matter. If you want an authoritative opinion on which to hang a legal challenge it'll costya, to say nothing of the legal action itself. It’s interesting how the FOI process seems to be stalling too. One by one, the layers of accountability are being eroded. ...and some people still believe that pushing power further away from us is a good idea.
|
|