@JBCVAT@DanNeidle Agree. I'm just highlighting some more VAT inconsistencies. Set up a business training company, register for VAT. Set up a medical services company, exempt. Opt to pay for hip op rather than NHS, no VAT. Opt for fee paying school rather than state, VAT. Cakes v biscuits again!
@DanNeidle Dan, given VAT now applies to private education, do you think private medical care should remain exempt? There would appear to be many parallels between the two.
@DanNeidle Just as obvious business training customers are businesses, who can recover VAT.... so why the difference between private medical companies and business training companies?
@DanNeidle Of course, it may be that VAT and indeed tax in general is based more on political expediency and layer on layer of tweaks rather than logic and sense! (I expect you might agree with me on that) 😀. 3/3
@DanNeidle Secondly, isn't applying VAT exemption based on customer type is rather like the old sales tax? First 20 years of my career was spent in SMEs delivering training almost exclusively to businesses. Training companies are allowed to reclaim input VAT but not medical? 2/3
@paulbhampton@DanNeidle Sadly, many reputable accountants promoted these schemes and similar ones such as EFRBS. When your accountant advises you incorporate your business, or use the flat rate VAT scheme, etc, to legitimately save tax, you listen. So when these schemes were recommended….
@DanNeidle@cmackinlay@ICAEW@CIOTNews@UKLabour Dan, any reason why conditional exemption could not have been an option (like is it with historic houses open to the public)? This way for as long as the next generation continue to farm no IHT, but if they sell up and cash in at any point then they pay full IHT. Seems fairer?
@DanNeidle@TaxFoundation Isn’t this a bit misleading - you couldn’t claim twice for the cost of the asset. Just once for the *actual cost* of the asset, and once for the *interest* incurred on the borrowing to finance it, i.e. just once for the all-in cost of the asset?
@ungagged13@DanNeidle If the company is a listed PLC then the shares will indeed be suspended (also LSE deadlines require information to be published quicker than CH).
@RobertBasnett @edlonguk@DanNeidle No, the increase is not “on the school”. The school must add 20% VAT to its fees, which means the increase is “on the parents”. Schools may of course reduce their fees to lessen the impact if they can make savings (or offer discounts to particular parents who may struggle).
@RobDotHutton@DanNeidle So the reality is it may work in reverse for the very wealthiest schools but for many it will mean redundancies and many more will mean closure. 3/3
@RobDotHutton@DanNeidle ...if school fees become subject to VAT and the providers don't pass on the increase, they lose 16.7% of their revenue. A very significant number of schools can't afford that on their current cost base (many are operating at margins of around 10%, and many more at breakeven). 2/x
Surely this (along with the marshmallow size conundrum, the hot pasty debacle, the nutrition bar mystery, and countless others…) is a huge waste of resources. Why are none of the parties proposing VAT reform / simplification?
@DanNeidle A system that says a small marshmallow (ingredients) and a large marshmallow (food requiring onward prep) are zero rated but a medium sized marshmallow (confectionery) is standard rated - without specifying what counts as small, medium, and large - is clearly nuts. Reform needed!
@ChrisGiles_ If the UK imposes VAT on private schools, it will be the only western economy to tax education in this way. Education is VAT/sales tax exempt throughout Europe and the USA.