+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Posts 11 to 15 of 15
  1. #11

    Nervous Newbie


    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    9
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    1
    Likes (Received)
    0

    Default

    I appreciate what you say Cojak. I can do maths but i just dont know how HMRC calculate the APN which i have heard is horribly over estimated, thats what my worry is.


    If it is 17,000 on the APN and is what i owe then brilliant.

    But otherwise, if its over estimated and they demand lets say 50,000 +, what the hell am i supposed to do?? I couldnt afford that! Many sleepless nights recently. =(

  2. #12
    eek
    eek is offline

    bored now

    eek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    😂
    Posts
    21,948
    Thanks (Given)
    228
    Thanks (Received)
    1122
    Likes (Given)
    1004
    Likes (Received)
    3388

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rogiebear View Post
    I appreciate what you say Cojak. I can do maths but i just dont know how HMRC calculate the APN which i have heard is horribly over estimated, thats what my worry is.


    If it is 17,000 on the APN and is what i owe then brilliant.

    But otherwise, if its over estimated and they demand lets say 50,000 +, what the hell am i supposed to do?? I couldnt afford that! Many sleepless nights recently. =(
    If you look at webberg's comment you will see that HMRC may use different methodologies to work out what they decide to charge you. That may be the scary rollup method I posted , it may be the method he discussed the problem is that without knowing the scheme you are on and the mood of both tax tribunals and the person writing the request we just don't know...
    merely at clientco for the entertainment

  3. #13

    TripleIronDad

    BrilloPad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    95,105
    Thanks (Given)
    19473
    Thanks (Received)
    5087
    Likes (Given)
    19473
    Likes (Received)
    8872

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rogiebear View Post
    I appreciate what you say Cojak. I can do maths but i just dont know how HMRC calculate the APN which i have heard is horribly over estimated, thats what my worry is.


    If it is 17,000 on the APN and is what i owe then brilliant.

    But otherwise, if its over estimated and they demand lets say 50,000 +, what the hell am i supposed to do?? I couldnt afford that! Many sleepless nights recently. =(
    Usually they underestimate. You then get another bill for NI. Another for interest. Another for fees. And another for surcharges.

    Which scheme were you in for which years?
    Katy Perry - don't be afraid to catch feels. Taylor Swift - feels $1 a go.

  4. #14

    Contractor Among Contractors


    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    WTT Consulting Ltd - London and online
    Posts
    1,526
    Thanks (Given)
    24
    Thanks (Received)
    266
    Likes (Given)
    66
    Likes (Received)
    513

    Default

    To have a 16/17 APN indicates a scheme that has either survived from pre 2011 (unlikely) or has been DOTAS disclosed recently (equally unlikely).

    I confess that I'm not aware of a 16/17 DOTAS scheme other than perhaps one that is tightly controlled by its creators.

    You sure your scheme meets the conditions for an APN.

    (And no, I'm not going to spell them out. They have been discussed ad nauseum in these threads).

  5. #15

    Some things in Moderation

    cojak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Look to your right...
    Posts
    17,814
    Thanks (Given)
    462
    Thanks (Received)
    952
    Likes (Given)
    4025
    Likes (Received)
    2638

    Default

    Take a look at this thread for more APN info.

    http://forums.contractoruk.com/hmrc-...n-grounds.html

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.