Accountant rant- seriously thinking of ditching after two months!

[northernladuk]

Holy thread resurrection batman.. 4 years??

[BolshieBastard]

I would go with one of the big companies where everything is a procedure.
Then you will start to learn the ropes and get to know what is due when.

Then move accountants if you wish after a couple of years.

I started off with a "normal" accountant about 15 years ago and everything was late of just in time. It was a nightmare, especially as I did not really understand everything required and when.

Absolute rubbish. If you do your research, there's no reason not to use an IT Contractor savvy local accountancy group. Ive been with mine 17 years.

[eek]

Absolute rubbish. If you do your research, there's no reason not to use an IT Contractor savvy local accountancy group. Ive been with mine 17 years.

There are an awful lot of Freelance consultants all of whom use limited companies. I would be very surprised if you couldn't find a couple of local ones within minutes. We probably need to work out a few questions to ask.. Something expenses related to confirm they know what they are talking about would probably do...

Most clueful contractors could actually do it themselves provided they kept an eye on the answers in this forum....

[tractor]

...

The key problem is that people don't learn to run a business before buying one.

This resurrection proves nothing has changed.

[tractor]

...

Holy thread resurrection batman.. 4 years??

This is your fault. It is a direct result of people using the search function that you are so fond of

HTH

[psychocandy]

Been with Nixon Williams since this shambles. They are BRILLIANT.
You know me - I like to moan but NW give me no reason ever.

Will I ever leave and try a local accountant - not a chance in hell. I've got a few mates with similar stories. Seem to be a lot of local accountants who see the IT contractor market as a nice little earner but, in truth, have little or no idea how to cope with.

[Ticktock]

My original accountant was a local guy. Not a contractor only accountant, but listed it as a speciality, and definitely understood contractor Ltds, was able to advise re share splits, etc on Ltd creation. I only left him really as getting a response from him later was like blood from a stone, delays with EOY accounts, etc.

When we went to interview potential replacement firms all seemed to understand the marketplace - what varied in some cases was their attitude to risk.
Had one advising me to buy a £100k company car (I think it was the Porsche hybrid) as it had such low emissions, put in alphabet shares, give shares to my mother and let her give me the cash back as a Christmas present, claim expenses left right and centre ("don't worry, if we're investigated we can just say...") and were proud to say how many investigations they'd faced over the past year (a lot), but that they'd got away with it.
Instead, we went with a different local firm who are actually professional. Again, they are not contractor only - they represent some largeish firms as well, but clearly understand contractor Ltds. They understand my attitude to risk and to tax, reviewed our books and advised some changes, are quick to respond to our small number of queries, etc.

An accountant does not have to be a Contractor Only accountant to understand contractors.

[northernladuk]

An accountant does not have to be a Contractor Only accountant to understand contractors.

No but certainly helps and massively reduces the risk of finding a bum one.. and there have been enough posts from people, myself included that have been shafted by a local guy saying he understands contractors.

One thing I worry about is fairly new guys that pick a bad one of these and then blunder on not really knowing. Friend of mine had one of these just as I was starting contracting. He advised him just put everything through the books cause HMRC wouldn't check, which included a new Porsche boxter company car My friend thought he was the best accountant in the world.....

[psychocandy]

My original accountant was a local guy. Not a contractor only accountant, but listed it as a speciality, and definitely understood contractor Ltds, was able to advise re share splits, etc on Ltd creation. I only left him really as getting a response from him later was like blood from a stone, delays with EOY accounts, etc.

When we went to interview potential replacement firms all seemed to understand the marketplace - what varied in some cases was their attitude to risk.
Had one advising me to buy a £100k company car (I think it was the Porsche hybrid) as it had such low emissions, put in alphabet shares, give shares to my mother and let her give me the cash back as a Christmas present, claim expenses left right and centre ("don't worry, if we're investigated we can just say...") and were proud to say how many investigations they'd faced over the past year (a lot), but that they'd got away with it.
Instead, we went with a different local firm who are actually professional. Again, they are not contractor only - they represent some largeish firms as well, but clearly understand contractor Ltds. They understand my attitude to risk and to tax, reviewed our books and advised some changes, are quick to respond to our small number of queries, etc.

An accountant does not have to be a Contractor Only accountant to understand contractors.

Maybe not. In my case, this guy was on IPSEs list of accredited accountants too. So he'd paid IPSE or done some sort of training and he got to be listed on their website.

BUT he was REALLY completely useless. No idea about IR35, no idea about how best to split company. In fact, he cocked so much stuff up it took NW a while to sort out.

Sad thing is I moaned to IPSE about him and they were not interested in the slightest. Told me if he'd done anything wrong to report him to the trade body. BUT they were not interested that he was just useless.

[Ticktock]

Maybe not. In my case, this guy was on IPSEs list of accredited accountants too. So he'd paid IPSE or done some sort of training and he got to be listed on their website.

BUT he was REALLY completely useless. No idea about IR35, no idea about how best to split company. In fact, he cocked so much stuff up it took NW a while to sort out.

Sad thing is I moaned to IPSE about him and they were not interested in the slightest. Told me if he'd done anything wrong to report him to the trade body. BUT they were not interested that he was just useless.

What I found useful when interviewing accountants was to have the little bits of knowledge I've picked up on here (oh dear). Knowing in advance that I did not want to move to alphabet shares - and why I did not want to do that - was useful for understanding why I wanted to turn one accountant down. Knowing the level of salary I wanted to take in 2014/15, and why, was useful when hearing what the accountants suggested would be optimal. And so on.

If you're going in blind then you could up with someone really dodgy who puts your business in danger. It's all about due diligence once again, and understanding that the accountant recommends while you decide.