Reply to: Using a separate personal account for a limited company

[Batcher]

[northernladuk]

But it's not.

[Batcher]

Should be.

But it's not.

[northernladuk]

No it isn't.

Should be.

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

Thanks, so essentially...it's a grey area that technically you *might* get away with if there was good justification. And like tax avoidance schemes, people are getting away with it year on year but the HMRC hasn't decided to crack down on them *yet*.

I think I can easily agree with this, because yes you're right HMRC are not going to accept money saving as a reason.

Oh well, it was just an idea going through my mind...when you see all these attractive offers for personal accounts that would make money just sitting there earn more and with a business account you seemingly get shafted on every transaction.

Um no

[d000hg]

No it isn't.

[northernladuk]

Thread closed..

[northernladuk]

You've asked a question, been advised against it by everyone in this thread including three qualified accountants, and you still want to argue the toss?

That's because it's one of 'THOSE' type of questions that only has one acceptable response. So...

[tractor]

...

Challenging a factual fact with a factual even that factually happened...

"There are 3 things that need to be correct for a payment to be guaranteed and within the bounds of the AML regulations;"

Which part was wrong? If one of your deposits went astray, your bank would say 'tough, you got it wrong' and it would be up to you to try to sort it out. They may help, they may not but I doubt they are obliged to. Secondly, your payments would not be compliant with AML regulations and your bank may find itself in trouble if they were audited too.

So whilst yes, I can walk blindfold across the M25 at lunchtime, it might not be a good idea.

[ndoody]

You've asked a question, been advised against it by everyone in this thread including three qualified accountants, and you still want to argue the toss?

Challenging a factual fact with a factual even that factually happened...

[DiscoStu]

Have paid, for many years and continue to do so to this day, into one of the wifes bank accounts without her name in the payee field. Only the sort code and a/c number is correct on this account, has always made it easier to distinguish it from her main bank account and give me an indicator of what it's for. And I'm talking about the payee name specifically, but neither does the reference incidentally. Never once had a problem paying money into that account...

You've asked a question, been advised against it by everyone in this thread including three qualified accountants, and you still want to argue the toss?

[Scruff]

After all this, I am yet to understand what your intention is? Are you trying to save £10 per month bank charges? If it's to earn a higher interest rate then you could invest this in a wholesale money market account, or other instruments which are done in the Company name?

[ndoody]

You cannot.

There are 3 things that need to be correct for a payment to be guaranteed and within the bounds of the AML regulations; the account name, number and sort code. However much you disagree with it and want it to be different, it is a fact.

Additonally as has already been pointed out, HMRC would treat the whole lot as a director's loan. The point being that you personally have access to it.

Have paid, for many years and continue to do so to this day, into one of the wifes bank accounts without her name in the payee field. Only the sort code and a/c number is correct on this account, has always made it easier to distinguish it from her main bank account and give me an indicator of what it's for. And I'm talking about the payee name specifically, but neither does the reference incidentally. Never once had a problem paying money into that account...

[tractor]

...

lol, I would never try to devoid my children of getting all the money and support they needed whether I was with my partner or not. I'm not sure I see any other situation in which I have to prove I'm worth less, as I'm not *generally* trying to do anything I shouldn't.

I don't see why you'd have to make any adjustment to an invoice, except for the sort code and a/c number. I could put pay to "rumplestiltskin farted in my face" as long as the a/c number and sort code are correct.

You cannot.

There are 3 things that need to be correct for a payment to be guaranteed and within the bounds of the AML regulations; the account name, number and sort code. However much you disagree with it and want it to be different, it is a fact.

Additonally as has already been pointed out, HMRC would treat the whole lot as a director's loan. The point being that you personally have access to it.

[northernladuk]

Thanks, so essentially...it's a grey area that technically you *might* get away with if there was good justification. And like tax avoidance schemes, people are getting away with it year on year but the HMRC hasn't decided to crack down on them *yet*.

I think I can easily agree with this, because yes you're right HMRC are not going to accept money saving as a reason.

Oh well, it was just an idea going through my mind...when you see all these attractive offers for personal accounts that would make money just sitting there earn more and with a business account you seemingly get shafted on every transaction.

Don't wanna be rude but I would advise a bit more professional attitude to your business and learn to keep personal and business completely separate. Thinking like this is just going to end up screwing yourself over royally in the future.