• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Accountant recommendation threads inc local requests

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Jessica@WhiteFieldTax
    replied
    [QUOTE=Maslins;2540951]
    Originally posted by malvolio

    Second time I've seen someone comment along these lines (different firm each time). Is the concern that by having modest net assets the company may be in trouble and not around much longer? The Maslins year end is a few days away, and our closing net assets will likely be a bit below that, didn't realise it might put people off.

    Personally I feel it's a bit silly, as assuming the company is profitable, it's fairly easily manipulated by timing of dividends.
    Eg company A and company B both have £100k retained profits in run up to end of March (and let's assume that's their year end).
    Company A declares an £80k dividend 31 March, year end accounts show net assets £20k.
    Company B delays a day, declaring an £80k dividend 1 April, year end accounts show net assets £100k.
    Is company B any healthier than company A?
    Or could be because intangibles are purchased or internally generated?

    IMV it shows good extraction planning... I'm trying to get my retained profit down year on year - its £135k or so at present, so hopefully under £100k this year.

    Leave a comment:


  • Maslins
    replied
    Originally posted by malvolio
    A company with a rolling net worth of around £28k. Hmmm...
    Second time I've seen someone comment along these lines (different firm each time). Is the concern that by having modest net assets the company may be in trouble and not around much longer? The Maslins year end is a few days away, and our closing net assets will likely be a bit below that, didn't realise it might put people off.

    Personally I feel it's a bit silly, as assuming the company is profitable, it's fairly easily manipulated by timing of dividends.
    Eg company A and company B both have £100k retained profits in run up to end of March (and let's assume that's their year end).
    Company A declares an £80k dividend 31 March, year end accounts show net assets £20k.
    Company B delays a day, declaring an £80k dividend 1 April, year end accounts show net assets £100k.
    Is company B any healthier than company A?
    The real "asset" of an accounting firm is the recurring client income. When a firm is bought/sold, that's what the money is predominantly for...but when it's been generated internally it's not something that shows on the balance sheet with any value.

    Leave a comment:


  • Teejay
    replied
    Originally posted by PTP View Post
    Does anyone know a good contractor accountant that doesn't use Freeagent?
    Hi There,

    i'm with an accountancy firm called WIS Accountancy, they use their own in-built accounting software that they provide us for free. Although they have the portal, which provides us with all the numbers we need to check on the dividends and expense claims, they send us a regular update on my account balances and how much more i can withdraw from my company. Do check them out...
    Last edited by administrator; 21 June 2018, 10:07. Reason: Fix quote

    Leave a comment:


  • Jessica@WhiteFieldTax
    replied
    Moving away from Spreadsheets on to a package like FreeAgent means the accountants skill mix needs to go up, IMV. Less staff hours per client, but from a higher grde of staff.

    Its why - and I'm not just talking about FreeAgent and the PSC market, but rather bringing 30+ years of experience into the mix - most clients don't see accounting fees come down when they move onto more sophisticated platforms. better data, easier management, better reporting, maybe; outright value adjusted time saving, no.

    Leave a comment:


  • malvolio
    replied
    Originally posted by Fred Bloggs View Post
    It's rather ridiculous/amusing that FreeAgent would be blamed for any mistakes. The mistakes are 99.99% certain to be input errors on the part of the human, not the machine.
    Or, more simply, GIGO...

    Leave a comment:


  • Fred Bloggs
    replied
    Originally posted by Darren at DynamoAccounts View Post
    Ouch.....don't think can remember that far back @NLUK

    Would agree though that struggling to see where there's any benefit of not operating through one of the online platforms. Seems like the issue is with the firm itself rather than the software.
    It's rather ridiculous/amusing that FreeAgent would be blamed for any mistakes. The mistakes are 99.99% certain to be input errors on the part of the human, not the machine.

    Leave a comment:


  • Darren at Fox-Bartfield
    replied
    Freeagent

    Originally posted by northernladuk View Post
    When Darren has finished revising for his AS level maths he'll respond as well.
    Ouch.....don't think can remember that far back @NLUK

    Would agree though that struggling to see where there's any benefit of not operating through one of the online platforms. Seems like the issue is with the firm itself rather than the software.

    Leave a comment:


  • northernladuk
    replied
    Originally posted by PTP View Post
    @ NLUK You're obviously missing the point:

    *When the accountant didn't have FreeAgent, they used suitably qualified staff and/or put thought into their numbers........figures they produced were reliable.
    *Since they started using FreeAgent, they've regularly made mistakes, suggesting they are now using school leavers (or equivalent) and/or just relying on the computer for everything instead of putting thought into their numbers.
    Not really missing the point but I'm not bought in to what you are saying. My situation tells me I'm better where I am with a FA accountant than I was with a spreadsheet AND a local one man band one so it works for me.

    It's just the first time I've heard this complaint in the years of reading FA threads on here so just trying to argue it's a lone argument so maybe not the best one. Your call of course.

    When Darren has finished revising for his AS level maths he'll respond as well.

    Leave a comment:


  • Darren at Fox-Bartfield
    replied
    Freeagent

    I'm sure most firms would provide an alternative (e.g. Xero, etc) or revert back to spreadsheets if you'd prefer. Personally, wouldn't recommend it however and may be better to find another firm that provides the appropriate level of service and includes the software at the same time.

    With MTD on the horizon, reverting back to spreadsheets may well be counter productive and IMHO you'll lose a bit of the transparency to help manage your business. Entirely personal choice but would suggest finding an accountant that provides that more personalised service but maintaining the online software.

    Leave a comment:


  • PTP
    replied
    @ NLUK You're obviously missing the point:

    *When the accountant didn't have FreeAgent, they used suitably qualified staff and/or put thought into their numbers........figures they produced were reliable.
    *Since they started using FreeAgent, they've regularly made mistakes, suggesting they are now using school leavers (or equivalent) and/or just relying on the computer for everything instead of putting thought into their numbers.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X