There's an interesting article on AccountingWeb:

http://www.accountingweb.co.uk/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=185107&d=1032&h=1019&f=1026

I've put the comments I posted below:

"the company's goods and services do not require reporting"
Nichola
Despite many pages of HMRC advice available very little of it seems
useful in completing a P11D. You say "the company's goods and services
do not require reporting.
Everytime I have asked HMRC staff about this I am told that any
payments that are not covered by a dispensation have to be entered on
a P11D. Some clients have a large number of payments made by directors
personally for company expenses and each transaction has to be
reviewed to see whether it falls within a dispensation. It would
appear to be much more sensible to allow a dispensation for any
payments that are not taxable if the employer's policy identifies any
taxable payments when made.
Everytime I have asked HMRC staff about payments using company credit
cards I have been told that these have to be included on P11Ds. The
next question is: Where? The P11D guide is not much help. When you
look at "C Vouchers and credit cards" it says:
"Enter the total of:
• the cost to you of providing any vouchers (including season tickets)
which can be exchanged for money, goods or services
• any extra cost to you in providing the money, goods or services for
which the vouchers are exchanged
• all expenses and other payments met by credit cards you provided,
except
– expenses directly in connection with the car(s) at section F
– expenses more appropriate to Section N. Do not include any vouchers,
such as cash
vouchers, which have suffered tax under PAYE (see part B above)."
What does "expenses more appropriate to Section N" mean? Why don't
they explain what is more appropriate?
Nichola
Can you provide any references that I can use in deciding what to tell
my clients? I shouldn't be in the position of having to choose between
what a well respected tax expert says on the internet and what I get
told every time I query it with HMRC staff - despite what we know
about their lack of knowledge.

On 24 Jun, 03:29, PeterSaxton  wrote:
> There's an interesting article on AccountingWeb:
>
> http://www.accountingweb.co.uk/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=185107&d=1032&h=10...
>
> I've put the comments I posted below:
>
> "the company's goods and services do not require reporting"
> Nichola
> Despite many pages of HMRC advice available very little of it seems
> useful in completing a P11D. You say "the company's goods and services
> do not require reporting.
> Everytime I have asked HMRC staff about this I am told that any
> payments that are not covered by a dispensation have to be entered on
> a P11D. Some clients have a large number of payments made by directors
> personally for company expenses and each transaction has to be
> reviewed to see whether it falls within a dispensation. It would
> appear to be much more sensible to allow a dispensation for any
> payments that are not taxable if the employer's policy identifies any
> taxable payments when made.
> Everytime I have asked HMRC staff about payments using company credit
> cards I have been told that these have to be included on P11Ds. The
> next question is: Where? The P11D guide is not much help. When you
> look at "C Vouchers and credit cards" it says:
> "Enter the total of:
> • the cost to you of providing any vouchers (including season tickets)
> which can be exchanged for money, goods or services
> • any extra cost to you in providing the money, goods or services for
> which the vouchers are exchanged
> • all expenses and other payments met by credit cards you provided,
> except
> – expenses directly in connection with the car(s) at section F
> – expenses more appropriate to Section N. Do not include any vouchers,
> such as cash
> vouchers, which have suffered tax under PAYE (see part B above)."
> What does "expenses more appropriate to Section N" mean? Why don't
> they explain what is more appropriate?
> Nichola
> Can you provide any references that I can use in deciding what to tell
> my clients? I shouldn't be in the position of having to choose between
> what a well respected tax expert says on the internet and what I get
> told every time I query it with HMRC staff - despite what we know
> about their lack of knowledge.

I've been directed to Section 5 of the 480 Guide:

"Purchases on employer’s behalf
Businesses are often run in such a way that employees make payments on
their employer’s behalf.
For example, an employee may buy stamps, stationary and items of
equipment for the employer
and be reimbursed the costs incurred from petty cash or by cheque.
Such transactions are not
providing the employee with either earnings or expenses because the
employee has received no
money of his own. Accordingly such reimbursements do not feature on
the P11D."

I'm still not sure of the logic of all this. The above seems sensible
to me despite every time I ask anybody on a helpline they always say
that everything has to be entered if no dispensation. What about home
phone calls used for business? There may be a contract between the
employee and the telephone company but it is still purchased on the
employer's behalf similarly to stationery (notice I don't fall into
the spelling trap of the HMRC buffoons!). I would say that if an
employee entertains customers the purchases are still made on behalf
of the employer. You may say that these items are what HMRC says they
want to know about but it the guides don't seem to be too explanatory
- eg. "expenses more appropriate to Section N"

"PeterSaxton"  wrote in message 
news:b0bf186c-bb46-43f1-96b6-8bfef6ec1d79@2g2000hsn.googlegroups.com...
On 24 Jun, 03:29, PeterSaxton  wrote:
> There's an interesting article on AccountingWeb:
>
> http://www.accountingweb.co.uk/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=185107&d=1032&h=10...
>
> I've put the comments I posted below:
>
> "the company's goods and services do not require reporting"
> Nichola
> Despite many pages of HMRC advice available very little of it seems
> useful in completing a P11D. You say "the company's goods and services
> do not require reporting.
> Everytime I have asked HMRC staff about this I am told that any
> payments that are not covered by a dispensation have to be entered on
> a P11D. Some clients have a large number of payments made by directors
> personally for company expenses and each transaction has to be
> reviewed to see whether it falls within a dispensation. It would
> appear to be much more sensible to allow a dispensation for any
> payments that are not taxable if the employer's policy identifies any
> taxable payments when made.
> Everytime I have asked HMRC staff about payments using company credit
> cards I have been told that these have to be included on P11Ds. The
> next question is: Where? The P11D guide is not much help. When you
> look at "C Vouchers and credit cards" it says:
> "Enter the total of:
> • the cost to you of providing any vouchers (including season tickets)
> which can be exchanged for money, goods or services
> • any extra cost to you in providing the money, goods or services for
> which the vouchers are exchanged
> • all expenses and other payments met by credit cards you provided,
> except
> – expenses directly in connection with the car(s) at section F
> – expenses more appropriate to Section N. Do not include any vouchers,
> such as cash
> vouchers, which have suffered tax under PAYE (see part B above)."
> What does "expenses more appropriate to Section N" mean? Why don't
> they explain what is more appropriate?
> Nichola
> Can you provide any references that I can use in deciding what to tell
> my clients? I shouldn't be in the position of having to choose between
> what a well respected tax expert says on the internet and what I get
> told every time I query it with HMRC staff - despite what we know
> about their lack of knowledge.

I've been directed to Section 5 of the 480 Guide:

"Purchases on employer’s behalf
Businesses are often run in such a way that employees make payments on
their employer’s behalf.
For example, an employee may buy stamps, stationary and items of
equipment for the employer
and be reimbursed the costs incurred from petty cash or by cheque.
Such transactions are not
providing the employee with either earnings or expenses because the
employee has received no
money of his own. Accordingly such reimbursements do not feature on
the P11D."

I'm still not sure of the logic of all this. The above seems sensible
to me despite every time I ask anybody on a helpline they always say
that everything has to be entered if no dispensation. What about home
phone calls used for business? There may be a contract between the
employee and the telephone company but it is still purchased on the
employer's behalf similarly to stationery (notice I don't fall into
the spelling trap of the HMRC buffoons!). I would say that if an
employee entertains customers the purchases are still made on behalf
of the employer. You may say that these items are what HMRC says they
want to know about but it the guides don't seem to be too explanatory
- eg. "expenses more appropriate to Section N"

Being an HMRC buffoon who has to check these, petty cash is asy as the 
employee will obtain a receipt for the purchase and exchange this for cash 
from the petty cash. This has the same effect if the company did this, 
although it cant as it has no physical being.

The Company Credit card is open to abuse as the company will pay this on 
receipt of the bill, and not on the receipts/invoices for the individual 
transactions. It therefore requires more detailed analysis and it is 
possible that there will be items purchased that do not meet the Wholly etc. 
Frankly, if an employer has a system that checks that only items that meet 
this criteria are paid on this or via expenses, I do not have a problem in 
authorising a dispensation for the expenses, whether reimbursed or purchased 
on Company Credit Card.

If no such checks and balances are in place, there should be no dispensation 
and any purchase made whether by credit card or reimbursed should go on P11D 
as Expenses and it is then up to the employee to prove that allowable 
deduction is available.

On 24 Jun, 20:20, "Simon"  wrote:
> "PeterSaxton"  wrote in message
>
> news:b0bf186c-bb46-43f1-96b6-8bfef6ec1d79@2g2000hsn.googlegroups.com...
> On 24 Jun, 03:29, PeterSaxton  wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > There's an interesting article on AccountingWeb:
>
> >http://www.accountingweb.co.uk/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=185107&d=1032&h=10...
>
> > I've put the comments I posted below:
>
> > "the company's goods and services do not require reporting"
> > Nichola
> > Despite many pages of HMRC advice available very little of it seems
> > useful in completing a P11D. You say "the company's goods and services
> > do not require reporting.
> > Everytime I have asked HMRC staff about this I am told that any
> > payments that are not covered by a dispensation have to be entered on
> > a P11D. Some clients have a large number of payments made by directors
> > personally for company expenses and each transaction has to be
> > reviewed to see whether it falls within a dispensation. It would
> > appear to be much more sensible to allow a dispensation for any
> > payments that are not taxable if the employer's policy identifies any
> > taxable payments when made.
> > Everytime I have asked HMRC staff about payments using company credit
> > cards I have been told that these have to be included on P11Ds. The
> > next question is: Where? The P11D guide is not much help. When you
> > look at "C Vouchers and credit cards" it says:
> > "Enter the total of:
> > • the cost to you of providing any vouchers (including season tickets> > which can be exchanged for money, goods or services
> > • any extra cost to you in providing the money, goods or services for
> > which the vouchers are exchanged
> > • all expenses and other payments met by credit cards you provided,
> > except
> > – expenses directly in connection with the car(s) at section F
> > – expenses more appropriate to Section N. Do not include any vouchers> > such as cash
> > vouchers, which have suffered tax under PAYE (see part B above)."
> > What does "expenses more appropriate to Section N" mean? Why don't
> > they explain what is more appropriate?
> > Nichola
> > Can you provide any references that I can use in deciding what to tell
> > my clients? I shouldn't be in the position of having to choose between
> > what a well respected tax expert says on the internet and what I get
> > told every time I query it with HMRC staff - despite what we know
> > about their lack of knowledge.
>
> I've been directed to Section 5 of the 480 Guide:
>
> "Purchases on employer’s behalf
> Businesses are often run in such a way that employees make payments on
> their employer’s behalf.
> For example, an employee may buy stamps, stationary and items of
> equipment for the employer
> and be reimbursed the costs incurred from petty cash or by cheque.
> Such transactions are not
> providing the employee with either earnings or expenses because the
> employee has received no
> money of his own. Accordingly such reimbursements do not feature on
> the P11D."
>
> I'm still not sure of the logic of all this. The above seems sensible
> to me despite every time I ask anybody on a helpline they always say
> that everything has to be entered if no dispensation. What about home
> phone calls used for business? There may be a contract between the
> employee and the telephone company but it is still purchased on the
> employer's behalf similarly to stationery (notice I don't fall into
> the spelling trap of the HMRC buffoons!). I would say that if an
> employee entertains customers the purchases are still made on behalf
> of the employer. You may say that these items are what HMRC says they
> want to know about but it the guides don't seem to be too explanatory
> - eg. "expenses more appropriate to Section N"
>
> Being an HMRC buffoon who has to check these, petty cash is asy as the
> employee will obtain a receipt for the purchase and exchange this for cash
> from the petty cash. This has the same effect if the company did this,
> although it cant as it has no physical being.
>
> The Company Credit card is open to abuse as the company will pay this on
> receipt of the bill, and not on the receipts/invoices for the individual
> transactions. It therefore requires more detailed analysis and it is
> possible that there will be items purchased that do not meet the Wholly etc.
> Frankly, if an employer has a system that checks that only items that meet
> this criteria are paid on this or via expenses, I do not have a problem in
> authorising a dispensation for the expenses, whether reimbursed or purchased
> on Company Credit Card.
>
> If no such checks and balances are in place, there should be no dispensation
> and any purchase made whether by credit card or reimbursed should go on P11D
> as Expenses and it is then up to the employee to prove that allowable
> deduction is available.

Simon

But the reality is different. Whether items are entered on P11Ds or
not makes no difference to what abuse takes place in an employer's
business. Does the entry or a lack of an entry on a P11D put HMRC on
enquiry (in an audit sense)? If you read the comments in the article
you will see that most employers, accountants and HMRC staff offering
advise have no idea what should go on a P11D and the guidance doesn't
help much.

I see you have not even tried to justify the guidance when it says:
"expenses more appropriate to Section N" mean? Why don't they explain
what is more appropriate?

If you asked me "where should I put this item, in section C or section
N?" and I said "put it where it is more appropriate" and walked off
what would you think? Yet HMRC buffoons get away with it.

Why don't you have a document that really says what should go on a
P11D and what should not go on a P11D? Why should there be a note that
is categoric about what doesn't have to go on the P11D and have it
hidden away on page 13 of a 99 page document which isn't specifically
meant to explain what goes on a P11D yet a similar note isn't in the
document that is supposedly meant to guide you how to complete a P11D?
Why does the guidance document simply say put something where it is
more appropriate?

Simon, I know you don't like me saying that there are too many
buffoons in HMRC and this isn't aimed at you personally, but HMRC
don't seem to be able to do the obvious things right. How many people
should review a form like the P11D guide yet they still can't pick up
the wrong spelling of stationery. A few years ago the Inland Revenue
sent out a printed form which had "Inland Revenue" in big black
letters at the top spelt wrongly! Has the moron culture taken over to
such an extent that a desire to get spelling correct has disappeared?
I'm not talking about a few typos on the internet when people bash out
an answer - I'm talking about documents that organisations should be
seriously considering the content due to its important nature.

<much snipping>


> I've been directed to Section 5 of the 480 Guide:
>
> "Purchases on employer’s behalf

<and more>

> I'm still not sure of the logic of all this. The above 
> seems sensible
> to me despite every time I ask anybody on a helpline they 
> always say
> that everything has to be entered if no dispensation. 
> .........

IIRC it helps to look at the right old palaver with NICs and 
the Overdrive case.  That threatened to shine light into 
corners of the approach for tax which rarely if ever caused 
no problems in practice.  (Eg when office juniors go to buy 
stationery using a company credit card do they have to 
recite a particular form of words?)  While clarity, 
certainty and transparency are desirable, the price of 
perfection may be prohibitive


-- 
Robin

"neverwas"  wrote in message 
news:MOs8k.15572$E41.10569@text.news.virginmedia.com...
> <much snipping>
>
>
>> I've been directed to Section 5 of the 480 Guide:
>>
>> "Purchases on employer's behalf
>
> <and more>
>
>> I'm still not sure of the logic of all this. The above 
>> seems sensible
>> to me despite every time I ask anybody on a helpline they 
>> always say
>> that everything has to be entered if no dispensation. 
>> .........
>
> IIRC it helps to look at the right old palaver with NICs 
> and the Overdrive case.  That threatened to shine light 
> into corners of the approach for tax which rarely if ever 
> caused no problems in practice.  (Eg when office juniors 
> go to buy stationery using a company credit card do they 
> have to recite a particular form of words?)  While 
> clarity, certainty and transparency are desirable, the 
> price of perfection may be prohibitive
>
>
> -- 
> Robin
>

Ahem, please ignore the "no"

-- 
Robin

On 25 Jun, 15:43, "neverwas"  wrote:
> "neverwas"  wrote in message
>
> news:MOs8k.15572$E41.10569@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > <much snipping>
>
> >> I've been directed to Section 5 of the 480 Guide:
>
> >> "Purchases on employer's behalf
>
> > <and more>
>
> >> I'm still not sure of the logic of all this. The above
> >> seems sensible
> >> to me despite every time I ask anybody on a helpline they
> >> always say
> >> that everything has to be entered if no dispensation.
> >> .........
>
> > IIRC it helps to look at the right old palaver with NICs
> > and the Overdrive case.  That threatened to shine light
> > into corners of the approach for tax which rarely if ever
> > caused no problems in practice.  (Eg when office juniors
> > go to buy stationery using a company credit card do they
> > have to recite a particular form of words?)  While
> > clarity, certainty and transparency are desirable, the
> > price of perfection may be prohibitive
>
> > --
> > Robin
>
> Ahem, please ignore the "no"
>
> --
> Robin-

I nearly always do!

"PeterSaxton"  wrote in message 
news:793dc7f9-7d62-42b9-8c32-04644673aae5@k30g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
On 24 Jun, 20:20, "Simon"  wrote:
> "PeterSaxton"  wrote in message
>
> news:b0bf186c-bb46-43f1-96b6-8bfef6ec1d79@2g2000hsn.googlegroups.com...
> On 24 Jun, 03:29, PeterSaxton  wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > There's an interesting article on AccountingWeb:
>
> >http://www.accountingweb.co.uk/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=185107&d=1032&h=10...
>
> > I've put the comments I posted below:
>
> > "the company's goods and services do not require reporting"
> > Nichola
> > Despite many pages of HMRC advice available very little of it seems
> > useful in completing a P11D. You say "the company's goods and services
> > do not require reporting.
> > Everytime I have asked HMRC staff about this I am told that any
> > payments that are not covered by a dispensation have to be entered on
> > a P11D. Some clients have a large number of payments made by directors
> > personally for company expenses and each transaction has to be
> > reviewed to see whether it falls within a dispensation. It would
> > appear to be much more sensible to allow a dispensation for any
> > payments that are not taxable if the employer's policy identifies any
> > taxable payments when made.
> > Everytime I have asked HMRC staff about payments using company credit
> > cards I have been told that these have to be included on P11Ds. The
> > next question is: Where? The P11D guide is not much help. When you
> > look at "C Vouchers and credit cards" it says:
> > "Enter the total of:
> > • the cost to you of providing any vouchers (including season tickets)
> > which can be exchanged for money, goods or services
> > • any extra cost to you in providing the money, goods or services for
> > which the vouchers are exchanged
> > • all expenses and other payments met by credit cards you provided,
> > except
> > – expenses directly in connection with the car(s) at section F
> > – expenses more appropriate to Section N. Do not include any vouchers,
> > such as cash
> > vouchers, which have suffered tax under PAYE (see part B above)."
> > What does "expenses more appropriate to Section N" mean? Why don't
> > they explain what is more appropriate?
> > Nichola
> > Can you provide any references that I can use in deciding what to tell
> > my clients? I shouldn't be in the position of having to choose between
> > what a well respected tax expert says on the internet and what I get
> > told every time I query it with HMRC staff - despite what we know
> > about their lack of knowledge.
>
> I've been directed to Section 5 of the 480 Guide:
>
> "Purchases on employer’s behalf
> Businesses are often run in such a way that employees make payments on
> their employer’s behalf.
> For example, an employee may buy stamps, stationary and items of
> equipment for the employer
> and be reimbursed the costs incurred from petty cash or by cheque.
> Such transactions are not
> providing the employee with either earnings or expenses because the
> employee has received no
> money of his own. Accordingly such reimbursements do not feature on
> the P11D."
>
> I'm still not sure of the logic of all this. The above seems sensible
> to me despite every time I ask anybody on a helpline they always say
> that everything has to be entered if no dispensation. What about home
> phone calls used for business? There may be a contract between the
> employee and the telephone company but it is still purchased on the
> employer's behalf similarly to stationery (notice I don't fall into
> the spelling trap of the HMRC buffoons!). I would say that if an
> employee entertains customers the purchases are still made on behalf
> of the employer. You may say that these items are what HMRC says they
> want to know about but it the guides don't seem to be too explanatory
> - eg. "expenses more appropriate to Section N"
>
> Being an HMRC buffoon who has to check these, petty cash is asy as the
> employee will obtain a receipt for the purchase and exchange this for cash
> from the petty cash. This has the same effect if the company did this,
> although it cant as it has no physical being.
>
> The Company Credit card is open to abuse as the company will pay this on
> receipt of the bill, and not on the receipts/invoices for the individual
> transactions. It therefore requires more detailed analysis and it is
> possible that there will be items purchased that do not meet the Wholly 
> etc.
> Frankly, if an employer has a system that checks that only items that meet
> this criteria are paid on this or via expenses, I do not have a problem in
> authorising a dispensation for the expenses, whether reimbursed or 
> purchased
> on Company Credit Card.
>
> If no such checks and balances are in place, there should be no 
> dispensation
> and any purchase made whether by credit card or reimbursed should go on 
> P11D
> as Expenses and it is then up to the employee to prove that allowable
> deduction is available.

Simon

But the reality is different. Whether items are entered on P11Ds or
not makes no difference to what abuse takes place in an employer's
business. Does the entry or a lack of an entry on a P11D put HMRC on
enquiry (in an audit sense)? If you read the comments in the article
you will see that most employers, accountants and HMRC staff offering
advise have no idea what should go on a P11D and the guidance doesn't
help much.

I see you have not even tried to justify the guidance when it says:
"expenses more appropriate to Section N" mean? Why don't they explain
what is more appropriate?

If you asked me "where should I put this item, in section C or section
N?" and I said "put it where it is more appropriate" and walked off
what would you think? Yet HMRC buffoons get away with it.

Why don't you have a document that really says what should go on a
P11D and what should not go on a P11D? Why should there be a note that
is categoric about what doesn't have to go on the P11D and have it
hidden away on page 13 of a 99 page document which isn't specifically
meant to explain what goes on a P11D yet a similar note isn't in the
document that is supposedly meant to guide you how to complete a P11D?
Why does the guidance document simply say put something where it is
more appropriate?

Simon, I know you don't like me saying that there are too many
buffoons in HMRC and this isn't aimed at you personally, but HMRC
don't seem to be able to do the obvious things right. How many people
should review a form like the P11D guide yet they still can't pick up
the wrong spelling of stationery. A few years ago the Inland Revenue
sent out a printed form which had "Inland Revenue" in big black
letters at the top spelt wrongly! Has the moron culture taken over to
such an extent that a desire to get spelling correct has disappeared?
I'm not talking about a few typos on the internet when people bash out
an answer - I'm talking about documents that organisations should be
seriously considering the content due to its important nature.

Peter,

I know that you do not ntend personal insult and frankly I dislike to form 
myself. I also dislike the fact that the majority of persons who get a P11D 
do not need to make a full tax return and a simple S336/7/8 claim form 
should be provided, but it isnt and we are not set up or have the resources 
to process all the SA returns that would be necesary to process all the 
claims. And as to what the employers get up to before it gets on the P11D is 
beyond belief. However, most do actually make some effort to get it right 
but both the department and businesses have treated this with a certain 
amount of contempt over the years. lets face it neither the employer or 
employee have to sign any declaration on the form and IR had a history 
assess and allow so even when we were told about it, we waited until the SA 
return before actually getting the tax.

In the defence of those tasked with providing the guidance, this just can't 
cover every type of expense incured or paid by business, this would end up a 
darn sight more than 99 pages, it would be worse than the HBOS prospectus I 
have just received in 200 pages of tightly packed size 8 font.

I think that the first move is to get a decent dispensation in place and one 
thing that helps this is a decent policy document. This would result in only 
actually taxable issues get on the P11D.

Part N is where payment is made to the employee and C where the payment is 
made to the supplier or via a company credit card. Both are Class 1 NI so if 
there is no available deduction, it is not going to make a substantial 
difference to tax or NI. The thing for me is just to make sure that 
something that is liable to Class 1 is not shown in a box marked in brown 
and then double charged for NI.

On 25 Jun, 22:38, "Simon"  wrote:
> "PeterSaxton"  wrote in message
>
> news:793dc7f9-7d62-42b9-8c32-04644673aae5@k30g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> On 24 Jun, 20:20, "Simon"  wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "PeterSaxton"  wrote in message
>
> >news:b0bf186c-bb46-43f1-96b6-8bfef6ec1d79@2g2000hsn.googlegroups.com...
> > On 24 Jun, 03:29, PeterSaxton  wrote:
>
> > > There's an interesting article on AccountingWeb:
>
> > >http://www.accountingweb.co.uk/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=185107&d=1032&h=10...
>
> > > I've put the comments I posted below:
>
> > > "the company's goods and services do not require reporting"
> > > Nichola
> > > Despite many pages of HMRC advice available very little of it seems
> > > useful in completing a P11D. You say "the company's goods and services
> > > do not require reporting.
> > > Everytime I have asked HMRC staff about this I am told that any
> > > payments that are not covered by a dispensation have to be entered on
> > > a P11D. Some clients have a large number of payments made by directors
> > > personally for company expenses and each transaction has to be
> > > reviewed to see whether it falls within a dispensation. It would
> > > appear to be much more sensible to allow a dispensation for any
> > > payments that are not taxable if the employer's policy identifies any
> > > taxable payments when made.
> > > Everytime I have asked HMRC staff about payments using company credit
> > > cards I have been told that these have to be included on P11Ds. The
> > > next question is: Where? The P11D guide is not much help. When you
> > > look at "C Vouchers and credit cards" it says:
> > > "Enter the total of:
> > > • the cost to you of providing any vouchers (including season tickets)
> > > which can be exchanged for money, goods or services
> > > • any extra cost to you in providing the money, goods or services for
> > > which the vouchers are exchanged
> > > • all expenses and other payments met by credit cards you provided,
> > > except
> > > – expenses directly in connection with the car(s) at section F
> > > – expenses more appropriate to Section N. Do not include any vouchers,
> > > such as cash
> > > vouchers, which have suffered tax under PAYE (see part B above)."
> > > What does "expenses more appropriate to Section N" mean? Why don't
> > > they explain what is more appropriate?
> > > Nichola
> > > Can you provide any references that I can use in deciding what to tell
> > > my clients? I shouldn't be in the position of having to choose between
> > > what a well respected tax expert says on the internet and what I get
> > > told every time I query it with HMRC staff - despite what we know
> > > about their lack of knowledge.
>
> > I've been directed to Section 5 of the 480 Guide:
>
> > "Purchases on employer’s behalf
> > Businesses are often run in such a way that employees make payments on
> > their employer’s behalf.
> > For example, an employee may buy stamps, stationary and items of
> > equipment for the employer
> > and be reimbursed the costs incurred from petty cash or by cheque.
> > Such transactions are not
> > providing the employee with either earnings or expenses because the
> > employee has received no
> > money of his own. Accordingly such reimbursements do not feature on
> > the P11D."
>
> > I'm still not sure of the logic of all this. The above seems sensible
> > to me despite every time I ask anybody on a helpline they always say
> > that everything has to be entered if no dispensation. What about home
> > phone calls used for business? There may be a contract between the
> > employee and the telephone company but it is still purchased on the
> > employer's behalf similarly to stationery (notice I don't fall into
> > the spelling trap of the HMRC buffoons!). I would say that if an
> > employee entertains customers the purchases are still made on behalf
> > of the employer. You may say that these items are what HMRC says they
> > want to know about but it the guides don't seem to be too explanatory
> > - eg. "expenses more appropriate to Section N"
>
> > Being an HMRC buffoon who has to check these, petty cash is asy as the
> > employee will obtain a receipt for the purchase and exchange this for cash
> > from the petty cash. This has the same effect if the company did this,
> > although it cant as it has no physical being.
>
> > The Company Credit card is open to abuse as the company will pay this on
> > receipt of the bill, and not on the receipts/invoices for the individual
> > transactions. It therefore requires more detailed analysis and it is
> > possible that there will be items purchased that do not meet the Wholly
> > etc.
> > Frankly, if an employer has a system that checks that only items that meet
> > this criteria are paid on this or via expenses, I do not have a problem in
> > authorising a dispensation for the expenses, whether reimbursed or
> > purchased
> > on Company Credit Card.
>
> > If no such checks and balances are in place, there should be no
> > dispensation
> > and any purchase made whether by credit card or reimbursed should go on
> > P11D
> > as Expenses and it is then up to the employee to prove that allowable
> > deduction is available.
>
> Simon
>
> But the reality is different. Whether items are entered on P11Ds or
> not makes no difference to what abuse takes place in an employer's
> business. Does the entry or a lack of an entry on a P11D put HMRC on
> enquiry (in an audit sense)? If you read the comments in the article
> you will see that most employers, accountants and HMRC staff offering
> advise have no idea what should go on a P11D and the guidance doesn't
> help much.
>
> I see you have not even tried to justify the guidance when it says:
> "expenses more appropriate to Section N" mean? Why don't they explain
> what is more appropriate?
>
> If you asked me "where should I put this item, in section C or section
> N?" and I said "put it where it is more appropriate" and walked off
> what would you think? Yet HMRC buffoons get away with it.
>
> Why don't you have a document that really says what should go on a
> P11D and what should not go on a P11D? Why should there be a note that
> is categoric about what doesn't have to go on the P11D and have it
> hidden away on page 13 of a 99 page document which isn't specifically
> meant to explain what goes on a P11D yet a similar note isn't in the
> document that is supposedly meant to guide you how to complete a P11D?
> Why does the guidance document simply say put something where it is
> more appropriate?
>
> Simon, I know you don't like me saying that there are too many
> buffoons in HMRC and this isn't aimed at you personally, but HMRC
> don't seem to be able to do the obvious things right. How many people
> should review a form like the P11D guide yet they still can't pick up
> the wrong spelling of stationery. A few years ago the Inland Revenue
> sent out a printed form which had "Inland Revenue" in big black
> letters at the top spelt wrongly! Has the moron culture taken over to
> such an extent that a desire to get spelling correct has disappeared?
> I'm not talking about a few typos on the internet when people bash out
> an answer - I'm talking about documents that organisations should be
> seriously considering the content due to its important nature.
>
> Peter,
>
> I know that you do not ntend personal insult and frankly I dislike to form
> myself. I also dislike the fact that the majority of persons who get a P11D
> do not need to make a full tax return and a simple S336/7/8 claim form
> should be provided, but it isnt and we are not set up or have the resources
> to process all the SA returns that would be necesary to process all the
> claims. And as to what the employers get up to before it gets on the P11D is
> beyond belief. However, most do actually make some effort to get it right
> but both the department and businesses have treated this with a certain
> amount of contempt over the years. lets face it neither the employer or
> employee have to sign any declaration on the form and IR had a history
> assess and allow so even when we were told about it, we waited until the SA
> return before actually getting the tax.
>
> In the defence of those tasked with providing the guidance, this just can't
> cover every type of expense incured or paid by business, this would end up a
> darn sight more than 99 pages, it would be worse than the HBOS prospectus I
> have just received in 200 pages of tightly packed size 8 font.
>
> I think that the first move is to get a decent dispensation in place and one
> thing that helps this is a decent policy document. This would result in only
> actually taxable issues get on the P11D.
>
> Part N is where payment is made to the employee and C where the payment is
> made to the supplier or via a company credit card. Both are Class 1 NI so if
> there is no available deduction, it is not going to make a substantial
> difference to tax or NI. The thing for me is just to make sure that
> something that is liable to Class 1 is not shown in a box marked in brown
> and then double charged for NI.


"all expenses and other payments met by credit cards you provided,
except
– expenses directly in connection with the car(s) at section F
– expenses more appropriate to Section N."

So, relating to the quote above, you mean that all payments made by
credit card except the payments specifically mentioned "travelling and
subsistence, entertainment, general expenses allowance for business
travel, home telephone and non-qualifying relocation expenses" should
go in C. Unfortunately, that is different to what N is for. N is for
"expenses payment made to, or on behalf of, the employee" which would
include "other expenses" at the bottom.

Why not change the P11d by having B also relate to directors, C relate
to vouchers only, M relate to subscriptions and professional fees,
delete "other expenses" from N and then add sections for any other
payments that would result in a tax or NIC charge? Have a big note
that says:,"if the expenses are not listed here and they don't result
in a tax or NIC charge then do not include on this form".

"PeterSaxton"  wrote in message 
news:11637ae9-c555-45ac-9f56-b61a0e2f92d4@f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
On 25 Jun, 22:38, "Simon"  wrote:
> "PeterSaxton"  wrote in message
>
> news:793dc7f9-7d62-42b9-8c32-04644673aae5@k30g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> On 24 Jun, 20:20, "Simon"  wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "PeterSaxton"  wrote in message
>
> >news:b0bf186c-bb46-43f1-96b6-8bfef6ec1d79@2g2000hsn.googlegroups.com...
> > On 24 Jun, 03:29, PeterSaxton  wrote:
>
> > > There's an interesting article on AccountingWeb:
>
> > >http://www.accountingweb.co.uk/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=185107&d=1032&h=10...
>
> > > I've put the comments I posted below:
>
> > > "the company's goods and services do not require reporting"
> > > Nichola
> > > Despite many pages of HMRC advice available very little of it seems
> > > useful in completing a P11D. You say "the company's goods and services
> > > do not require reporting.
> > > Everytime I have asked HMRC staff about this I am told that any
> > > payments that are not covered by a dispensation have to be entered on
> > > a P11D. Some clients have a large number of payments made by directors
> > > personally for company expenses and each transaction has to be
> > > reviewed to see whether it falls within a dispensation. It would
> > > appear to be much more sensible to allow a dispensation for any
> > > payments that are not taxable if the employer's policy identifies any
> > > taxable payments when made.
> > > Everytime I have asked HMRC staff about payments using company credit
> > > cards I have been told that these have to be included on P11Ds. The
> > > next question is: Where? The P11D guide is not much help. When you
> > > look at "C Vouchers and credit cards" it says:
> > > "Enter the total of:
> > > • the cost to you of providing any vouchers (including season tickets)
> > > which can be exchanged for money, goods or services
> > > • any extra cost to you in providing the money, goods or services for
> > > which the vouchers are exchanged
> > > • all expenses and other payments met by credit cards you provided,
> > > except
> > > – expenses directly in connection with the car(s) at section F
> > > – expenses more appropriate to Section N. Do not include any vouchers,
> > > such as cash
> > > vouchers, which have suffered tax under PAYE (see part B above)."
> > > What does "expenses more appropriate to Section N" mean? Why don't
> > > they explain what is more appropriate?
> > > Nichola
> > > Can you provide any references that I can use in deciding what to tell
> > > my clients? I shouldn't be in the position of having to choose between
> > > what a well respected tax expert says on the internet and what I get
> > > told every time I query it with HMRC staff - despite what we know
> > > about their lack of knowledge.
>
> > I've been directed to Section 5 of the 480 Guide:
>
> > "Purchases on employer’s behalf
> > Businesses are often run in such a way that employees make payments on
> > their employer’s behalf.
> > For example, an employee may buy stamps, stationary and items of
> > equipment for the employer
> > and be reimbursed the costs incurred from petty cash or by cheque.
> > Such transactions are not
> > providing the employee with either earnings or expenses because the
> > employee has received no
> > money of his own. Accordingly such reimbursements do not feature on
> > the P11D."
>
> > I'm still not sure of the logic of all this. The above seems sensible
> > to me despite every time I ask anybody on a helpline they always say
> > that everything has to be entered if no dispensation. What about home
> > phone calls used for business? There may be a contract between the
> > employee and the telephone company but it is still purchased on the
> > employer's behalf similarly to stationery (notice I don't fall into
> > the spelling trap of the HMRC buffoons!). I would say that if an
> > employee entertains customers the purchases are still made on behalf
> > of the employer. You may say that these items are what HMRC says they
> > want to know about but it the guides don't seem to be too explanatory
> > - eg. "expenses more appropriate to Section N"
>
> > Being an HMRC buffoon who has to check these, petty cash is asy as the
> > employee will obtain a receipt for the purchase and exchange this for 
> > cash
> > from the petty cash. This has the same effect if the company did this,
> > although it cant as it has no physical being.
>
> > The Company Credit card is open to abuse as the company will pay this on
> > receipt of the bill, and not on the receipts/invoices for the individual
> > transactions. It therefore requires more detailed analysis and it is
> > possible that there will be items purchased that do not meet the Wholly
> > etc.
> > Frankly, if an employer has a system that checks that only items that 
> > meet
> > this criteria are paid on this or via expenses, I do not have a problem 
> > in
> > authorising a dispensation for the expenses, whether reimbursed or
> > purchased
> > on Company Credit Card.
>
> > If no such checks and balances are in place, there should be no
> > dispensation
> > and any purchase made whether by credit card or reimbursed should go on
> > P11D
> > as Expenses and it is then up to the employee to prove that allowable
> > deduction is available.
>
> Simon
>
> But the reality is different. Whether items are entered on P11Ds or
> not makes no difference to what abuse takes place in an employer's
> business. Does the entry or a lack of an entry on a P11D put HMRC on
> enquiry (in an audit sense)? If you read the comments in the article
> you will see that most employers, accountants and HMRC staff offering
> advise have no idea what should go on a P11D and the guidance doesn't
> help much.
>
> I see you have not even tried to justify the guidance when it says:
> "expenses more appropriate to Section N" mean? Why don't they explain
> what is more appropriate?
>
> If you asked me "where should I put this item, in section C or section
> N?" and I said "put it where it is more appropriate" and walked off
> what would you think? Yet HMRC buffoons get away with it.
>
> Why don't you have a document that really says what should go on a
> P11D and what should not go on a P11D? Why should there be a note that
> is categoric about what doesn't have to go on the P11D and have it
> hidden away on page 13 of a 99 page document which isn't specifically
> meant to explain what goes on a P11D yet a similar note isn't in the
> document that is supposedly meant to guide you how to complete a P11D?
> Why does the guidance document simply say put something where it is
> more appropriate?
>
> Simon, I know you don't like me saying that there are too many
> buffoons in HMRC and this isn't aimed at you personally, but HMRC
> don't seem to be able to do the obvious things right. How many people
> should review a form like the P11D guide yet they still can't pick up
> the wrong spelling of stationery. A few years ago the Inland Revenue
> sent out a printed form which had "Inland Revenue" in big black
> letters at the top spelt wrongly! Has the moron culture taken over to
> such an extent that a desire to get spelling correct has disappeared?
> I'm not talking about a few typos on the internet when people bash out
> an answer - I'm talking about documents that organisations should be
> seriously considering the content due to its important nature.
>
> Peter,
>
> I know that you do not ntend personal insult and frankly I dislike to form
> myself. I also dislike the fact that the majority of persons who get a 
> P11D
> do not need to make a full tax return and a simple S336/7/8 claim form
> should be provided, but it isnt and we are not set up or have the 
> resources
> to process all the SA returns that would be necesary to process all the
> claims. And as to what the employers get up to before it gets on the P11D 
> is
> beyond belief. However, most do actually make some effort to get it right
> but both the department and businesses have treated this with a certain
> amount of contempt over the years. lets face it neither the employer or
> employee have to sign any declaration on the form and IR had a history
> assess and allow so even when we were told about it, we waited until the 
> SA
> return before actually getting the tax.
>
> In the defence of those tasked with providing the guidance, this just 
> can't
> cover every type of expense incured or paid by business, this would end up 
> a
> darn sight more than 99 pages, it would be worse than the HBOS prospectus 
> I
> have just received in 200 pages of tightly packed size 8 font.
>
> I think that the first move is to get a decent dispensation in place and 
> one
> thing that helps this is a decent policy document. This would result in 
> only
> actually taxable issues get on the P11D.
>
> Part N is where payment is made to the employee and C where the payment is
> made to the supplier or via a company credit card. Both are Class 1 NI so 
> if
> there is no available deduction, it is not going to make a substantial
> difference to tax or NI. The thing for me is just to make sure that
> something that is liable to Class 1 is not shown in a box marked in brown
> and then double charged for NI.


"all expenses and other payments met by credit cards you provided,
except
– expenses directly in connection with the car(s) at section F
– expenses more appropriate to Section N."

So, relating to the quote above, you mean that all payments made by
credit card except the payments specifically mentioned "travelling and
subsistence, entertainment, general expenses allowance for business
travel, home telephone and non-qualifying relocation expenses" should
go in C. Unfortunately, that is different to what N is for. N is for
"expenses payment made to, or on behalf of, the employee" which would
include "other expenses" at the bottom.

Why not change the P11d by having B also relate to directors, C relate
to vouchers only, M relate to subscriptions and professional fees,
delete "other expenses" from N and then add sections for any other
payments that would result in a tax or NIC charge? Have a big note
that says:,"if the expenses are not listed here and they don't result
in a tax or NIC charge then do not include on this form".


Sorry Peter but I am a little confused, as I cant find where the form 
requires you t make differentiat between employees and directors.

Personally, I think they could do with redesigning the form to bring it up 
to the modern world but the last time I suggested that I was told that the 
form would get far to long, and many would find it even more confusing.

On 27 Jun, 20:09, "Simon"  wrote:
> "PeterSaxton"  wrote in message
>
> news:11637ae9-c555-45ac-9f56-b61a0e2f92d4@f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> On 25 Jun, 22:38, "Simon"  wrote:
>
> > "PeterSaxton"  wrote in message
>
> >news:793dc7f9-7d62-42b9-8c32-04644673aae5@k30g2000hse.googlegroups.com..> > On 24 Jun, 20:20, "Simon"  wrote:
>
> > > "PeterSaxton"  wrote in message
>
> > >news:b0bf186c-bb46-43f1-96b6-8bfef6ec1d79@2g2000hsn.googlegroups.com..> > > On 24 Jun, 03:29, PeterSaxton  wrote:
>
> > > > There's an interesting article on AccountingWeb:
>
> > > >http://www.accountingweb.co.uk/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=185107&d=1032&h=10...
>
> > > > I've put the comments I posted below:
>
> > > > "the company's goods and services do not require reporting"
> > > > Nichola
> > > > Despite many pages of HMRC advice available very little of it seems
> > > > useful in completing a P11D. You say "the company's goods and services
> > > > do not require reporting.
> > > > Everytime I have asked HMRC staff about this I am told that any
> > > > payments that are not covered by a dispensation have to be entered on
> > > > a P11D. Some clients have a large number of payments made by directors
> > > > personally for company expenses and each transaction has to be
> > > > reviewed to see whether it falls within a dispensation. It would
> > > > appear to be much more sensible to allow a dispensation for any
> > > > payments that are not taxable if the employer's policy identifies any
> > > > taxable payments when made.
> > > > Everytime I have asked HMRC staff about payments using company credit
> > > > cards I have been told that these have to be included on P11Ds. The
> > > > next question is: Where? The P11D guide is not much help. When you
> > > > look at "C Vouchers and credit cards" it says:
> > > > "Enter the total of:
> > > > • the cost to you of providing any vouchers (including season tickets)
> > > > which can be exchanged for money, goods or services
> > > > • any extra cost to you in providing the money, goods or services for
> > > > which the vouchers are exchanged
> > > > • all expenses and other payments met by credit cards you provided,
> > > > except
> > > > – expenses directly in connection with the car(s) at section F
> > > > – expenses more appropriate to Section N. Do not include any vouchers,
> > > > such as cash
> > > > vouchers, which have suffered tax under PAYE (see part B above)."
> > > > What does "expenses more appropriate to Section N" mean? Why don't
> > > > they explain what is more appropriate?
> > > > Nichola
> > > > Can you provide any references that I can use in deciding what to tell
> > > > my clients? I shouldn't be in the position of having to choose between
> > > > what a well respected tax expert says on the internet and what I get
> > > > told every time I query it with HMRC staff - despite what we know
> > > > about their lack of knowledge.
>
> > > I've been directed to Section 5 of the 480 Guide:
>
> > > "Purchases on employer’s behalf
> > > Businesses are often run in such a way that employees make payments on
> > > their employer’s behalf.
> > > For example, an employee may buy stamps, stationary and items of
> > > equipment for the employer
> > > and be reimbursed the costs incurred from petty cash or by cheque.
> > > Such transactions are not
> > > providing the employee with either earnings or expenses because the
> > > employee has received no
> > > money of his own. Accordingly such reimbursements do not feature on
> > > the P11D."
>
> > > I'm still not sure of the logic of all this. The above seems sensible
> > > to me despite every time I ask anybody on a helpline they always say
> > > that everything has to be entered if no dispensation. What about home
> > > phone calls used for business? There may be a contract between the
> > > employee and the telephone company but it is still purchased on the
> > > employer's behalf similarly to stationery (notice I don't fall into
> > > the spelling trap of the HMRC buffoons!). I would say that if an
> > > employee entertains customers the purchases are still made on behalf
> > > of the employer. You may say that these items are what HMRC says they
> > > want to know about but it the guides don't seem to be too explanatory
> > > - eg. "expenses more appropriate to Section N"
>
> > > Being an HMRC buffoon who has to check these, petty cash is asy as the
> > > employee will obtain a receipt for the purchase and exchange this for
> > > cash
> > > from the petty cash. This has the same effect if the company did this> > > although it cant as it has no physical being.
>
> > > The Company Credit card is open to abuse as the company will pay this on
> > > receipt of the bill, and not on the receipts/invoices for the individual
> > > transactions. It therefore requires more detailed analysis and it is
> > > possible that there will be items purchased that do not meet the Wholly
> > > etc.
> > > Frankly, if an employer has a system that checks that only items that
> > > meet
> > > this criteria are paid on this or via expenses, I do not have a problem
> > > in
> > > authorising a dispensation for the expenses, whether reimbursed or
> > > purchased
> > > on Company Credit Card.
>
> > > If no such checks and balances are in place, there should be no
> > > dispensation
> > > and any purchase made whether by credit card or reimbursed should go on
> > > P11D
> > > as Expenses and it is then up to the employee to prove that allowable
> > > deduction is available.
>
> > Simon
>
> > But the reality is different. Whether items are entered on P11Ds or
> > not makes no difference to what abuse takes place in an employer's
> > business. Does the entry or a lack of an entry on a P11D put HMRC on
> > enquiry (in an audit sense)? If you read the comments in the article
> > you will see that most employers, accountants and HMRC staff offering
> > advise have no idea what should go on a P11D and the guidance doesn't
> > help much.
>
> > I see you have not even tried to justify the guidance when it says:
> > "expenses more appropriate to Section N" mean? Why don't they explain
> > what is more appropriate?
>
> > If you asked me "where should I put this item, in section C or section
> > N?" and I said "put it where it is more appropriate" and walked off
> > what would you think? Yet HMRC buffoons get away with it.
>
> > Why don't you have a document that really says what should go on a
> > P11D and what should not go on a P11D? Why should there be a note that
> > is categoric about what doesn't have to go on the P11D and have it
> > hidden away on page 13 of a 99 page document which isn't specifically
> > meant to explain what goes on a P11D yet a similar note isn't in the
> > document that is supposedly meant to guide you how to complete a P11D?
> > Why does the guidance document simply say put something where it is
> > more appropriate?
>
> > Simon, I know you don't like me saying that there are too many
> > buffoons in HMRC and this isn't aimed at you personally, but HMRC
> > don't seem to be able to do the obvious things right. How many people
> > should review a form like the P11D guide yet they still can't pick up
> > the wrong spelling of stationery. A few years ago the Inland Revenue
> > sent out a printed form which had "Inland Revenue" in big black
> > letters at the top spelt wrongly! Has the moron culture taken over to
> > such an extent that a desire to get spelling correct has disappeared?
> > I'm not talking about a few typos on the internet when people bash out
> > an answer - I'm talking about documents that organisations should be
> > seriously considering the content due to its important nature.
>
> > Peter,
>
> > I know that you do not ntend personal insult and frankly I dislike to form
> > myself. I also dislike the fact that the majority of persons who get a
> > P11D
> > do not need to make a full tax return and a simple S336/7/8 claim form
> > should be provided, but it isnt and we are not set up or have the
> > resources
> > to process all the SA returns that would be necesary to process all the
> > claims. And as to what the employers get up to before it gets on the P11D
> > is
> > beyond belief. However, most do actually make some effort to get it right
> > but both the department and businesses have treated this with a certain
> > amount of contempt over the years. lets face it neither the employer or
> > employee have to sign any declaration on the form and IR had a history
> > assess and allow so even when we were told about it, we waited until the
> > SA
> > return before actually getting the tax.
>
> > In the defence of those tasked with providing the guidance, this just
> > can't
> > cover every type of expense incured or paid by business, this would end up
> > a
> > darn sight more than 99 pages, it would be worse than the HBOS prospectus
> > I
> > have just received in 200 pages of tightly packed size 8 font.
>
> > I think that the first move is to get a decent dispensation in place and
> > one
> > thing that helps this is a decent policy document. This would result in
> > only
> > actually taxable issues get on the P11D.
>
> > Part N is where payment is made to the employee and C where the payment is
> > made to the supplier or via a company credit card. Both are Class 1 NI so
> > if
> > there is no available deduction, it is not going to make a substantial
> > difference to tax or NI. The thing for me is just to make sure that
> > something that is liable to Class 1 is not shown in a box marked in brown
> > and then double charged for NI.
>
> "all expenses and other payments met by credit cards you provided,
> except
> – expenses directly in connection with the car(s) at section F
> – expenses more appropriate to Section N."
>
> So, relating to the quote above, you mean that all payments made by
> credit card except the payments specifically mentioned "travelling and
> subsistence, entertainment, general expenses allowance for business
> travel, home telephone and non-qualifying relocation expenses" should
> go in C. Unfortunately, that is different to what N is for. N is for
> "expenses payment made to, or on behalf of, the employee" which would
> include "other expenses" at the bottom.
>
> Why not change the P11d by having B also relate to directors, C relate
> to vouchers only, M relate to subscriptions and professional fees,
> delete "other expenses" from N and then add sections for any other
> payments that would result in a tax or NIC charge? Have a big note
> that says:,"if the expenses are not listed here and they don't result
> in a tax or NIC charge then do not include on this form".
>
> Sorry Peter but I am a little confused, as I cant find where the form
> requires you t make differentiat between employees and directors.
>
C and L refers to employees and M refer's to directors

> Personally, I think they could do with redesigning the form to bring it up
> to the modern world but the last time I suggested that I was told that the
> form would get far to long, and many would find it even more confusing.

Surely making it longer should make it less confusing if it was done
right?

"PeterSaxton"  wrote in message 
news:1f54d029-f085-465d-8a40-be2e7cddb02a@59g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
On 27 Jun, 20:09, "Simon"  wrote:
> "PeterSaxton"  wrote in message
>
> news:11637ae9-c555-45ac-9f56-b61a0e2f92d4@f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> On 25 Jun, 22:38, "Simon"  wrote:
>
> > "PeterSaxton"  wrote in message
>
> >news:793dc7f9-7d62-42b9-8c32-04644673aae5@k30g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> > On 24 Jun, 20:20, "Simon"  wrote:
>
> > > "PeterSaxton"  wrote in message
>
> > >news:b0bf186c-bb46-43f1-96b6-8bfef6ec1d79@2g2000hsn.googlegroups.com...
> > > On 24 Jun, 03:29, PeterSaxton  wrote:
>
> > > > There's an interesting article on AccountingWeb:
>
> > > >http://www.accountingweb.co.uk/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=185107&d=1032&h=10...
>
> > > > I've put the comments I posted below:
>
> > > > "the company's goods and services do not require reporting"
> > > > Nichola
> > > > Despite many pages of HMRC advice available very little of it seems
> > > > useful in completing a P11D. You say "the company's goods and 
> > > > services
> > > > do not require reporting.
> > > > Everytime I have asked HMRC staff about this I am told that any
> > > > payments that are not covered by a dispensation have to be entered 
> > > > on
> > > > a P11D. Some clients have a large number of payments made by 
> > > > directors
> > > > personally for company expenses and each transaction has to be
> > > > reviewed to see whether it falls within a dispensation. It would
> > > > appear to be much more sensible to allow a dispensation for any
> > > > payments that are not taxable if the employer's policy identifies 
> > > > any
> > > > taxable payments when made.
> > > > Everytime I have asked HMRC staff about payments using company 
> > > > credit
> > > > cards I have been told that these have to be included on P11Ds. The
> > > > next question is: Where? The P11D guide is not much help. When you
> > > > look at "C Vouchers and credit cards" it says:
> > > > "Enter the total of:
> > > > • the cost to you of providing any vouchers (including season 
> > > > tickets)
> > > > which can be exchanged for money, goods or services
> > > > • any extra cost to you in providing the money, goods or services 
> > > > for
> > > > which the vouchers are exchanged
> > > > • all expenses and other payments met by credit cards you provided,
> > > > except
> > > > – expenses directly in connection with the car(s) at section F
> > > > – expenses more appropriate to Section N. Do not include any 
> > > > vouchers,
> > > > such as cash
> > > > vouchers, which have suffered tax under PAYE (see part B above)."
> > > > What does "expenses more appropriate to Section N" mean? Why don't
> > > > they explain what is more appropriate?
> > > > Nichola
> > > > Can you provide any references that I can use in deciding what to 
> > > > tell
> > > > my clients? I shouldn't be in the position of having to choose 
> > > > between
> > > > what a well respected tax expert says on the internet and what I get
> > > > told every time I query it with HMRC staff - despite what we know
> > > > about their lack of knowledge.
>
> > > I've been directed to Section 5 of the 480 Guide:
>
> > > "Purchases on employer’s behalf
> > > Businesses are often run in such a way that employees make payments on
> > > their employer’s behalf.
> > > For example, an employee may buy stamps, stationary and items of
> > > equipment for the employer
> > > and be reimbursed the costs incurred from petty cash or by cheque.
> > > Such transactions are not
> > > providing the employee with either earnings or expenses because the
> > > employee has received no
> > > money of his own. Accordingly such reimbursements do not feature on
> > > the P11D."
>
> > > I'm still not sure of the logic of all this. The above seems sensible
> > > to me despite every time I ask anybody on a helpline they always say
> > > that everything has to be entered if no dispensation. What about home
> > > phone calls used for business? There may be a contract between the
> > > employee and the telephone company but it is still purchased on the
> > > employer's behalf similarly to stationery (notice I don't fall into
> > > the spelling trap of the HMRC buffoons!). I would say that if an
> > > employee entertains customers the purchases are still made on behalf
> > > of the employer. You may say that these items are what HMRC says they
> > > want to know about but it the guides don't seem to be too explanatory
> > > - eg. "expenses more appropriate to Section N"
>
> > > Being an HMRC buffoon who has to check these, petty cash is asy as the
> > > employee will obtain a receipt for the purchase and exchange this for
> > > cash
> > > from the petty cash. This has the same effect if the company did this,
> > > although it cant as it has no physical being.
>
> > > The Company Credit card is open to abuse as the company will pay this 
> > > on
> > > receipt of the bill, and not on the receipts/invoices for the 
> > > individual
> > > transactions. It therefore requires more detailed analysis and it is
> > > possible that there will be items purchased that do not meet the 
> > > Wholly
> > > etc.
> > > Frankly, if an employer has a system that checks that only items that
> > > meet
> > > this criteria are paid on this or via expenses, I do not have a 
> > > problem
> > > in
> > > authorising a dispensation for the expenses, whether reimbursed or
> > > purchased
> > > on Company Credit Card.
>
> > > If no such checks and balances are in place, there should be no
> > > dispensation
> > > and any purchase made whether by credit card or reimbursed should go 
> > > on
> > > P11D
> > > as Expenses and it is then up to the employee to prove that allowable
> > > deduction is available.
>
> > Simon
>
> > But the reality is different. Whether items are entered on P11Ds or
> > not makes no difference to what abuse takes place in an employer's
> > business. Does the entry or a lack of an entry on a P11D put HMRC on
> > enquiry (in an audit sense)? If you read the comments in the article
> > you will see that most employers, accountants and HMRC staff offering
> > advise have no idea what should go on a P11D and the guidance doesn't
> > help much.
>
> > I see you have not even tried to justify the guidance when it says:
> > "expenses more appropriate to Section N" mean? Why don't they explain
> > what is more appropriate?
>
> > If you asked me "where should I put this item, in section C or section
> > N?" and I said "put it where it is more appropriate" and walked off
> > what would you think? Yet HMRC buffoons get away with it.
>
> > Why don't you have a document that really says what should go on a
> > P11D and what should not go on a P11D? Why should there be a note that
> > is categoric about what doesn't have to go on the P11D and have it
> > hidden away on page 13 of a 99 page document which isn't specifically
> > meant to explain what goes on a P11D yet a similar note isn't in the
> > document that is supposedly meant to guide you how to complete a P11D?
> > Why does the guidance document simply say put something where it is
> > more appropriate?
>
> > Simon, I know you don't like me saying that there are too many
> > buffoons in HMRC and this isn't aimed at you personally, but HMRC
> > don't seem to be able to do the obvious things right. How many people
> > should review a form like the P11D guide yet they still can't pick up
> > the wrong spelling of stationery. A few years ago the Inland Revenue
> > sent out a printed form which had "Inland Revenue" in big black
> > letters at the top spelt wrongly! Has the moron culture taken over to
> > such an extent that a desire to get spelling correct has disappeared?
> > I'm not talking about a few typos on the internet when people bash out
> > an answer - I'm talking about documents that organisations should be
> > seriously considering the content due to its important nature.
>
> > Peter,
>
> > I know that you do not ntend personal insult and frankly I dislike to 
> > form
> > myself. I also dislike the fact that the majority of persons who get a
> > P11D
> > do not need to make a full tax return and a simple S336/7/8 claim form
> > should be provided, but it isnt and we are not set up or have the
> > resources
> > to process all the SA returns that would be necesary to process all the
> > claims. And as to what the employers get up to before it gets on the 
> > P11D
> > is
> > beyond belief. However, most do actually make some effort to get it 
> > right
> > but both the department and businesses have treated this with a certain
> > amount of contempt over the years. lets face it neither the employer or
> > employee have to sign any declaration on the form and IR had a history
> > assess and allow so even when we were told about it, we waited until the
> > SA
> > return before actually getting the tax.
>
> > In the defence of those tasked with providing the guidance, this just
> > can't
> > cover every type of expense incured or paid by business, this would end 
> > up
> > a
> > darn sight more than 99 pages, it would be worse than the HBOS 
> > prospectus
> > I
> > have just received in 200 pages of tightly packed size 8 font.
>
> > I think that the first move is to get a decent dispensation in place and
> > one
> > thing that helps this is a decent policy document. This would result in
> > only
> > actually taxable issues get on the P11D.
>
> > Part N is where payment is made to the employee and C where the payment 
> > is
> > made to the supplier or via a company credit card. Both are Class 1 NI 
> > so
> > if
> > there is no available deduction, it is not going to make a substantial
> > difference to tax or NI. The thing for me is just to make sure that
> > something that is liable to Class 1 is not shown in a box marked in 
> > brown
> > and then double charged for NI.
>
> "all expenses and other payments met by credit cards you provided,
> except
> – expenses directly in connection with the car(s) at section F
> – expenses more appropriate to Section N."
>
> So, relating to the quote above, you mean that all payments made by
> credit card except the payments specifically mentioned "travelling and
> subsistence, entertainment, general expenses allowance for business
> travel, home telephone and non-qualifying relocation expenses" should
> go in C. Unfortunately, that is different to what N is for. N is for
> "expenses payment made to, or on behalf of, the employee" which would
> include "other expenses" at the bottom.
>
> Why not change the P11d by having B also relate to directors, C relate
> to vouchers only, M relate to subscriptions and professional fees,
> delete "other expenses" from N and then add sections for any other
> payments that would result in a tax or NIC charge? Have a big note
> that says:,"if the expenses are not listed here and they don't result
> in a tax or NIC charge then do not include on this form".
>
> Sorry Peter but I am a little confused, as I cant find where the form
> requires you t make differentiat between employees and directors.
>
C and L refers to employees and M refer's to directors

The whole form applies to bth employees and directors. The third box in M is 
restricted to directors as this is to entify any charge arising under S223 
ITEPA 2003.

> Personally, I think they could do with redesigning the form to bring it up
> to the modern world but the last time I suggested that I was told that the
> form would get far to long, and many would find it even more confusing.

Surely making it longer should make it less confusing if it was done
right?

The more boxes ther are, the greater the scope for error.

On 28 Jun, 22:19, "Simon"  wrote:
> "PeterSaxton"  wrote in message
>
> news:1f54d029-f085-465d-8a40-be2e7cddb02a@59g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> On 27 Jun, 20:09, "Simon"  wrote:> "PeterSaxton"  wrote in message
>
> >news:11637ae9-c555-45ac-9f56-b61a0e2f92d4@f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com..> > On 25 Jun, 22:38, "Simon"  wrote:
>
> > > "PeterSaxton"  wrote in message
>
> > >news:793dc7f9-7d62-42b9-8c32-04644673aae5@k30g2000hse.googlegroups.com> > > On 24 Jun, 20:20, "Simon"  wrote:
>
> > > > "PeterSaxton"  wrote in message
>
> > > >news:b0bf186c-bb46-43f1-96b6-8bfef6ec1d79@2g2000hsn.googlegroups.com> > > > On 24 Jun, 03:29, PeterSaxton  wrote:
>
> > > > > There's an interesting article on AccountingWeb:
>
> > > > >http://www.accountingweb.co.uk/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=185107&d=1032&h=10...
>
> > > > > I've put the comments I posted below:
>
> > > > > "the company's goods and services do not require reporting"
> > > > > Nichola
> > > > > Despite many pages of HMRC advice available very little of it seems
> > > > > useful in completing a P11D. You say "the company's goods and
> > > > > services
> > > > > do not require reporting.
> > > > > Everytime I have asked HMRC staff about this I am told that any
> > > > > payments that are not covered by a dispensation have to be entered
> > > > > on
> > > > > a P11D. Some clients have a large number of payments made by
> > > > > directors
> > > > > personally for company expenses and each transaction has to be
> > > > > reviewed to see whether it falls within a dispensation. It would
> > > > > appear to be much more sensible to allow a dispensation for any
> > > > > payments that are not taxable if the employer's policy identifies
> > > > > any
> > > > > taxable payments when made.
> > > > > Everytime I have asked HMRC staff about payments using company
> > > > > credit
> > > > > cards I have been told that these have to be included on P11Ds. The
> > > > > next question is: Where? The P11D guide is not much help. When you
> > > > > look at "C Vouchers and credit cards" it says:
> > > > > "Enter the total of:
> > > > > • the cost to you of providing any vouchers (including season
> > > > > tickets)
> > > > > which can be exchanged for money, goods or services
> > > > > • any extra cost to you in providing the money, goods or services
> > > > > for
> > > > > which the vouchers are exchanged
> > > > > • all expenses and other payments met by credit cards you provided,
> > > > > except
> > > > > – expenses directly in connection with the car(s) at section F
> > > > > – expenses more appropriate to Section N. Do not include any
> > > > > vouchers,
> > > > > such as cash
> > > > > vouchers, which have suffered tax under PAYE (see part B above)."
> > > > > What does "expenses more appropriate to Section N" mean? Why don't
> > > > > they explain what is more appropriate?
> > > > > Nichola
> > > > > Can you provide any references that I can use in deciding what to
> > > > > tell
> > > > > my clients? I shouldn't be in the position of having to choose
> > > > > between
> > > > > what a well respected tax expert says on the internet and what I get
> > > > > told every time I query it with HMRC staff - despite what we know
> > > > > about their lack of knowledge.
>
> > > > I've been directed to Section 5 of the 480 Guide:
>
> > > > "Purchases on employer’s behalf
> > > > Businesses are often run in such a way that employees make payments on
> > > > their employer’s behalf.
> > > > For example, an employee may buy stamps, stationary and items of
> > > > equipment for the employer
> > > > and be reimbursed the costs incurred from petty cash or by cheque.
> > > > Such transactions are not
> > > > providing the employee with either earnings or expenses because the
> > > > employee has received no
> > > > money of his own. Accordingly such reimbursements do not feature on
> > > > the P11D."
>
> > > > I'm still not sure of the logic of all this. The above seems sensible
> > > > to me despite every time I ask anybody on a helpline they always say
> > > > that everything has to be entered if no dispensation. What about home
> > > > phone calls used for business? There may be a contract between the
> > > > employee and the telephone company but it is still purchased on the
> > > > employer's behalf similarly to stationery (notice I don't fall into
> > > > the spelling trap of the HMRC buffoons!). I would say that if an
> > > > employee entertains customers the purchases are still made on behalf
> > > > of the employer. You may say that these items are what HMRC says they
> > > > want to know about but it the guides don't seem to be too explanatory
> > > > - eg. "expenses more appropriate to Section N"
>
> > > > Being an HMRC buffoon who has to check these, petty cash is asy as the
> > > > employee will obtain a receipt for the purchase and exchange this for
> > > > cash
> > > > from the petty cash. This has the same effect if the company did this,
> > > > although it cant as it has no physical being.
>
> > > > The Company Credit card is open to abuse as the company will pay this
> > > > on
> > > > receipt of the bill, and not on the receipts/invoices for the
> > > > individual
> > > > transactions. It therefore requires more detailed analysis and it is
> > > > possible that there will be items purchased that do not meet the
> > > > Wholly
> > > > etc.
> > > > Frankly, if an employer has a system that checks that only items that
> > > > meet
> > > > this criteria are paid on this or via expenses, I do not have a
> > > > problem
> > > > in
> > > > authorising a dispensation for the expenses, whether reimbursed or
> > > > purchased
> > > > on Company Credit Card.
>
> > > > If no such checks and balances are in place, there should be no
> > > > dispensation
> > > > and any purchase made whether by credit card or reimbursed should go
> > > > on
> > > > P11D
> > > > as Expenses and it is then up to the employee to prove that allowable
> > > > deduction is available.
>
> > > Simon
>
> > > But the reality is different. Whether items are entered on P11Ds or
> > > not makes no difference to what abuse takes place in an employer's
> > > business. Does the entry or a lack of an entry on a P11D put HMRC on
> > > enquiry (in an audit sense)? If you read the comments in the article
> > > you will see that most employers, accountants and HMRC staff offering
> > > advise have no idea what should go on a P11D and the guidance doesn't
> > > help much.
>
> > > I see you have not even tried to justify the guidance when it says:
> > > "expenses more appropriate to Section N" mean? Why don't they explain
> > > what is more appropriate?
>
> > > If you asked me "where should I put this item, in section C or section
> > > N?" and I said "put it where it is more appropriate" and walked off
> > > what would you think? Yet HMRC buffoons get away with it.
>
> > > Why don't you have a document that really says what should go on a
> > > P11D and what should not go on a P11D? Why should there be a note that
> > > is categoric about what doesn't have to go on the P11D and have it
> > > hidden away on page 13 of a 99 page document which isn't specifically
> > > meant to explain what goes on a P11D yet a similar note isn't in the
> > > document that is supposedly meant to guide you how to complete a P11D> > > Why does the guidance document simply say put something where it is
> > > more appropriate?
>
> > > Simon, I know you don't like me saying that there are too many
> > > buffoons in HMRC and this isn't aimed at you personally, but HMRC
> > > don't seem to be able to do the obvious things right. How many people
> > > should review a form like the P11D guide yet they still can't pick up
> > > the wrong spelling of stationery. A few years ago the Inland Revenue
> > > sent out a printed form which had "Inland Revenue" in big black
> > > letters at the top spelt wrongly! Has the moron culture taken over to
> > > such an extent that a desire to get spelling correct has disappeared?
> > > I'm not talking about a few typos on the internet when people bash out
> > > an answer - I'm talking about documents that organisations should be
> > > seriously considering the content due to its important nature.
>
> > > Peter,
>
> > > I know that you do not ntend personal insult and frankly I dislike to
> > > form
> > > myself. I also dislike the fact that the majority of persons who get a
> > > P11D
> > > do not need to make a full tax return and a simple S336/7/8 claim form
> > > should be provided, but it isnt and we are not set up or have the
> > > resources
> > > to process all the SA returns that would be necesary to process all the
> > > claims. And as to what the employers get up to before it gets on the
> > > P11D
> > > is
> > > beyond belief. However, most do actually make some effort to get it
> > > right
> > > but both the department and businesses have treated this with a certain
> > > amount of contempt over the years. lets face it neither the employer or
> > > employee have to sign any declaration on the form and IR had a history
> > > assess and allow so even when we were told about it, we waited until the
> > > SA
> > > return before actually getting the tax.
>
> > > In the defence of those tasked with providing the guidance, this just
> > > can't
> > > cover every type of expense incured or paid by business, this would end
> > > up
> > > a
> > > darn sight more than 99 pages, it would be worse than the HBOS
> > > prospectus
> > > I
> > > have just received in 200 pages of tightly packed size 8 font.
>
> > > I think that the first move is to get a decent dispensation in place and
> > > one
> > > thing that helps this is a decent policy document. This would result in
> > > only
> > > actually taxable issues get on the P11D.
>
> > > Part N is where payment is made to the employee and C where the payment
> > > is
> > > made to the supplier or via a company credit card. Both are Class 1 NI
> > > so
> > > if
> > > there is no available deduction, it is not going to make a substantial
> > > difference to tax or NI. The thing for me is just to make sure that
> > > something that is liable to Class 1 is not shown in a box marked in
> > > brown
> > > and then double charged for NI.
>
> > "all expenses and other payments met by credit cards you provided,
> > except
> > – expenses directly in connection with the car(s) at section F
> > – expenses more appropriate to Section N."
>
> > So, relating to the quote above, you mean that all payments made by
> > credit card except the payments specifically mentioned "travelling and
> > subsistence, entertainment, general expenses allowance for business
> > travel, home telephone and non-qualifying relocation expenses" should
> > go in C. Unfortunately, that is different to what N is for. N is for
> > "expenses payment made to, or on behalf of, the employee" which would
> > include "other expenses" at the bottom.
>
> > Why not change the P11d by having B also relate to directors, C relate
> > to vouchers only, M relate to subscriptions and professional fees,
> > delete "other expenses" from N and then add sections for any other
> > payments that would result in a tax or NIC charge? Have a big note
> > that says:,"if the expenses are not listed here and they don't result
> > in a tax or NIC charge then do not include on this form".
>
> > Sorry Peter but I am a little confused, as I cant find where the form
> > requires you t make differentiat between employees and directors.
>
> C and L refers to employees and M refer's to directors
>
> The whole form applies to bth employees and directors. The third box in M is
> restricted to directors as this is to entify any charge arising under S223
> ITEPA 2003.
>
> > Personally, I think they could do with redesigning the form to bring it up
> > to the modern world but the last time I suggested that I was told that the
> > form would get far to long, and many would find it even more confusing.
>
> Surely making it longer should make it less confusing if it was done
> right?
>
> The more boxes ther are, the greater the scope for error.

If there's 10 boxes there's a maximum possibility of 10 errors (error
defined as putting the correct value in the box) and if there's 20
boxes there's a maximum possibility of 20 errors - I accept that. I
feel that having more boxes gives the opportunity of using the form in
a way that reduces the likelihood of confusion.

PeterSaxton wrote:

> If there's 10 boxes there's a maximum possibility of 10 errors (error
> defined as putting the correct value in the box) and if there's 20
> boxes there's a maximum possibility of 20 errors - I accept that.

You're, erm, just testing, right?

> I
> feel that having more boxes gives the opportunity of using the form in
> a way that reduces the likelihood of confusion.

It strikes me that if the forms are seen as too complicated, it might
be better to simplify them by having "better" boxes, not necessarily
more of them.

On 29 Jun, 11:04, Ronald Raygun <no.s...@localhost.localdomain> wrote:
> PeterSaxton wrote:
> > If there's 10 boxes there's a maximum possibility of 10 errors (error
> > defined as putting the correct value in the box) and if there's 20
> > boxes there's a maximum possibility of 20 errors - I accept that.
>
> You're, erm, just testing, right?
>
> > I
> > feel that having more boxes gives the opportunity of using the form in
> > a way that reduces the likelihood of confusion.
>
> It strikes me that if the forms are seen as too complicated, it might
> be better to simplify them by having "better" boxes, not necessarily
> more of them.

It may not be easy to have "better" boxes without having more of them
given the information required.

PeterSaxton wrote:

> On 29 Jun, 11:04, Ronald Raygun <no.s...@localhost.localdomain> wrote:
>> PeterSaxton wrote:
>> > 
>> > I feel that having more boxes gives the opportunity of using the form
>> > in a way that reduces the likelihood of confusion.
>>
>> It strikes me that if the forms are seen as too complicated, it might
>> be better to simplify them by having "better" boxes, not necessarily
>> more of them.
> 
> It may not be easy to have "better" boxes without having more of them
> given the information required.

The answer might be to require less information.

"Ronald Raygun" <no.spam@localhost.localdomain> wrote in message 
news:sXK9k.17701$E41.6007@text.news.virginmedia.com...
> PeterSaxton wrote:
>
>> On 29 Jun, 11:04, Ronald Raygun <no.s...@localhost.localdomain> wrote:
>>> PeterSaxton wrote:
>>> >
>>> > I feel that having more boxes gives the opportunity of using the form
>>> > in a way that reduces the likelihood of confusion.
>>>
>>> It strikes me that if the forms are seen as too complicated, it might
>>> be better to simplify them by having "better" boxes, not necessarily
>>> more of them.
>>
>> It may not be easy to have "better" boxes without having more of them
>> given the information required.
>
> The answer might be to require less information.
>

One of my staff would have all expenses, no matter how there incurred paid 
as a taxable expense and have the employee submit a SA return to geta 
refund, if appropriate.

I do calm him down and we get to common sense.

The problem with the P11D is simply that it cant be all things to all people 
and it just cant do that. Maynbe ther could be lore logical questions but 
taking time to design those is more than I have time to especially with a 
tempremental laptop to do it on.

Goodnight now.