The payslips don't show it was tax-free. They show no tax was paid.
If I were you I would contact the lady at the university and ask if she you send you written verification of the amount paid, the period it covered, what it was for and that it was a tax-free bursary. You can then send a copy of that letter (or the original if they insist but I'm always wary doing that) with your explanation of what happened and request that they recalculate your tax.
I know the lady at the university said she would contact HMRC for you but I'd be doing that myself too. I am sure she is very efficient but it's not her who is being charged this money and you need to ask yourself where you sit on her 'to do' list of daily tasks.
Get the verification letter then follow the advice in my earlier post. I have worked for similar places. I know the procedure.
Ringing them up if they have no proof what you are saying is true is wasting everyone's time.
That's true. Thanks for that, I'll see what she says Monday and then ask her.
Have you ever been in a dispute with HMRC? They're an organisation that's grown way out of control.
My husband has had several dealings with them due to his company wrongly stating what company car he had and his tax therefore being too high etc etc. He has always found HMRC very helpful.
Have you ever been in a dispute with HMRC? They're an organisation that's grown way out of control.
Several times - i do the payroll for my small business. You have to remember that a) they aren't psychic and b) if you give them incorrect info then you'll get incorrectly assessed! The whole system has many faults but it goes better if you work with it, not against it....
Have you ever been in a dispute with HMRC? They're an organisation that's grown way out of control.
I think you mean "shrunk".
"HMRC has cut about 37,000 jobs since 2005, the Public and Commercial Services Union said last year. HMRC plans to cut a further 10,000 jobs by 2015 to reduce costs."
You have to remember that a) they aren't psychic and b) if you give them incorrect info then you'll get incorrectly assessed! The whole system has many faults but it goes better if you work with it, not against it....
Several times - i do the payroll for my small business. You have to remember that a) they aren't psychic and b) if you give them incorrect info then you'll get incorrectly assessed!
And sometimes when you point out they've got incorrect info, they'll ignore it. Even though under the DPA they are required to ensure their information is accurate. Or when they send VAT demands to a company that hasn't traded in years, they get put out when you suggest trying to claim VAT when VAT isn't due is VAT fraud. But that's just one of the little quirks of HMRC. If they think you owe them money, they'll make up an amount and pursue it as a debt.
The whole system has many faults but it goes better if you work with it, not against it....
It's a neat system. Appeals are handled internally. Suggestions of copying MPs doesn't really help as by convention, MPs don't get involved in individuals tax matters. Then HMRC doesn't like taking people to court because they have a tendency to lose given their systems are so shambolic. And when their 'executives' are called before parliamentary committees, they're questioned on oath because the committee doesn't seem to trust them.
Yet HMRC has also been asking for powers to take money from people automatically whilst in dispute and introduce 'pre-death taxes'. And this is the same HMRC who gave sweetheart deals to large businesses costing taxpayers billions, and has their own property managed by an off-shore company.
But that's going O/T. I still suggest writing to HMRC explaining the facts of life and that the Uni made a mistake. HMRC may well ignore this because they're just interested in taking money. Don't worry about why the OP should end up responsible for someone elses mistake, that's just our tax system.
And sometimes when you point out they've got incorrect info, they'll ignore it. Even though under the DPA they are required to ensure their information is accurate. Or when they send VAT demands to a company that hasn't traded in years, they get put out when you suggest trying to claim VAT when VAT isn't due is VAT fraud. But that's just one of the little quirks of HMRC. If they think you owe them money, they'll make up an amount and pursue it as a debt.
It's a neat system. Appeals are handled internally. Suggestions of copying MPs doesn't really help as by convention, MPs don't get involved in individuals tax matters. Then HMRC doesn't like taking people to court because they have a tendency to lose given their systems are so shambolic. And when their 'executives' are called before parliamentary committees, they're questioned on oath because the committee doesn't seem to trust them.
Yet HMRC has also been asking for powers to take money from people automatically whilst in dispute and introduce 'pre-death taxes'. And this is the same HMRC who gave sweetheart deals to large businesses costing taxpayers billions, and has their own property managed by an off-shore company.
But that's going O/T. I still suggest writing to HMRC explaining the facts of life and that the Uni made a mistake. HMRC may well ignore this because they're just interested in taking money. Don't worry about why the OP should end up responsible for someone elses mistake, that's just our tax system.
I rest my case with regard to your pathological hatred of HMRC, and have no intention of wasting my time replying to some of these absurd allegations but, to select an example, the emboldened part is simply untrue.
Reviews of HMRC decisions are conducted internally but appeals are handled by independent tax tribunals.
I rest my case with regard to your pathological hatred of HMRC, and have no intention of wasting my time replying to some of these absurd allegations but, to select an example, the emboldened part is simply untrue.
I'm wondering if perhaps you work for HMRC. Hence why you can't explain why it's trying to charge a non-trading/dormant company VAT and fining it for not using it's whizzy PAYE system. Then passing those fines and VAT demands to debt collectors even though no debt exists, which would be abundently clear if they tried taking it to court.
So again my advice to the OP would be to write explaining the amount is disputed and why. Otherwise as I said before, HMRC's automation systems will just churn out ever increasing demands.
Hence why you can't explain why it's trying to charge a non-trading/dormant company VAT and fining it for not using it's whizzy PAYE system. Then passing those fines and VAT demands to debt collectors even though no debt exists, which would be abundently clear if they tried taking it to court.
Clearly I can't because I don't know the details of the case. I don't intend to speculate either.
Hence why you can't explain why it's trying to charge a non-trading/dormant company VAT and fining it for not using it's whizzy PAYE system. Then passing those fines and VAT demands to debt collectors even though no debt exists, which would be abundently clear if they tried taking it to court.
Presumably the company was VAT registered. A company becoming dormant or non-trading does not relieve it from filing VAT returns, it needs to de-register for VAT otherwise HMRC will estimate the VAT due based on previous returns, I'd put a large wager on that being what's happened. Likewise for income tax and national insurance.
Presumably the company was VAT registered. A company becoming dormant or non-trading does not relieve it from filing VAT returns, it needs to de-register for VAT otherwise HMRC will estimate the VAT due based on previous returns, I'd put a large wager on that being what's happened. Likewise for income tax and national insurance.
Yup. Now stop and think about that process for a minute. Why would a dormant company need to de-register? If it's dormant, it's not doing anything and thus should not need to make VAT returns. If it starts trading again, then it would. Then there's the issue of estimates. VAT is only due on applicable transactions. If no transactions have occurred, no VAT is due. If the company made up a number and tried to reclaim it as VAT, HMRC would likely object. It's a dumb and inefficient process that could and should be changed.
Yup. Now stop and think about that process for a minute. Why would a dormant company need to de-register? If it's dormant, it's not doing anything and thus should not need to make VAT returns. If it starts trading again, then it would. Then there's the issue of estimates. VAT is only due on applicable transactions. If no transactions have occurred, no VAT is due. If the company made up a number and tried to reclaim it as VAT, HMRC would likely object. It's a dumb and inefficient process that could and should be changed.
If a company is dormant it can continue to file VAT returns with zero in all the boxes, or it can apply to be de-registered. Why is that a problem? HMRC aren't psychic and they need to be able to distinguish between a company that should have a filed a return and hasn't, and one that no longer needs to, and they won't know unless they are told. All this hassle with HMRC you're talking about is self-created and completely avoidable.
Yup. Now stop and think about that process for a minute. Why would a dormant company need to de-register? If it's dormant, it's not doing anything and thus should not need to make VAT returns. If it starts trading again, then it would. Then there's the issue of estimates. VAT is only due on applicable transactions. If no transactions have occurred, no VAT is due. If the company made up a number and tried to reclaim it as VAT, HMRC would likely object. It's a dumb and inefficient process that could and should be changed.
And how, pray tell, are the HMRC to know it's dormant? You may have filed Dormant Company accounts with Companies House but unless you actually tell HMRC the status of a previously trading and VAT reg'd company has changed then what do you expect?? I think i said it earlier - they aren't psychic!! All your own doing IMO, seems you made plenty of - incorrect - assumptions, so - no sympathy, sorry.
And how, pray tell, are the HMRC to know it's dormant? You may have filed Dormant Company accounts with Companies House but unless you actually tell HMRC the status of a previously trading and VAT reg'd company has changed then what do you expect?? I think i said it earlier - they aren't psychic!! .
Why do you assume psychic powers are necessary? You think HMRC has no ability to see records at Companies House? No psychic power needed there, just a bit of joined up public sector thinking. If the company starts trading again, then it can start paying VAT again. If it doesn't, then it's free to investigate. Why should a dormant company be compelled to de-register or waste time sending in nil returns though?
And why should HMRC be allowed to create ficticious VAT demands when if a company did the same thing, it would be prosecuted for fraud?
It is amusing though to see people trying to defend an inept bureaucracy that's allowed large businesses to get away with not paying billions though.
As it appears those whose responsibility it is to notify HMRC of such changes are clearly incapable of doing so - therefore they must assume HMRC are psychic... QED.
Your "argument" is holier than a sieve - you should have done something & you didn't, yet wish to place the blame elsewhere? Your own fault, no-one elses.
Why do you assume psychic powers are necessary? You think HMRC has no ability to see records at Companies House? No psychic power needed there, just a bit of joined up public sector thinking. If the company starts trading again, then it can start paying VAT again. If it doesn't, then it's free to investigate. Why should a dormant company be compelled to de-register or waste time sending in nil returns though?.
You really are exposing your ignorance. Companies are required to file accounts within 9 months of their year end. VAT returns are required every 3 months, so it could be over a year and a half before HMRC would be able to establish a company was dormant from its filed accounts. But really, can you imagine how much it would cost for HMRC to examine the filed accounts of every single company on the register to see if was dormant? Are they supposed not to chase any company for its VAT liability for 18 months just in case it's become dormant and the directors were too lazy or incompetent to inform them? Your attitude is ludicrous.
Your "argument" is holier than a sieve - you should have done something & you didn't, yet wish to place the blame elsewhere? Your own fault, no-one elses.
You really are exposing your ignorance. ......<snipped> .....
Are they supposed not to chase any company for its VAT liability for 18 months just in case it's become dormant and the directors were too lazy or incompetent to inform them? Your attitude is ludicrous.
I've been otherwise occupied for much of this afternoon but it's good to see that the flag of rationality is still proudly fluttering in the breeze.
But really, can you imagine how much it would cost for HMRC to examine the filed accounts of every single company on the register to see if was dormant?
You mean HMRC don't check filed accounts against their own records? No wonder it's a mess. Otherwise it should cost very little. Companies House only use a few tags for company status, and this being the 21st Century, HMRC doesn't need to send clerks to pore over paper records. Computers are clever like that. They can even talk to each other! Of course given HMRC's track record with IT projects, I'm perhaps being too optimistic here.
Are they supposed not to chase any company for its VAT liability for 18 months just in case it's become dormant and the directors were too lazy or incompetent to inform them?
Call me old fashioned but the way things are supposed to work is if tax is due, it's paid. If it's not paid, then it's HMRC's job to figure out if it was due. If the company shows as dormant and not trading, could that be a hint that no VAT is due and demands for VAT are in error or fraudulent?
Call me old fashioned but the way things are supposed to work is if tax is due, it's paid. If it's not paid, then it's HMRC's job to figure out if it was due. If the company shows as dormant and not trading, could that be a hint that no VAT is due and demands for VAT are in error or fraudulent?
As is your love of traditional bureaucracy.
As I said before it could be over 18 months before it could be established from filed statutory accounts if a company is dormant but you've managed to overlook that. But in your world view why on earth should a company even have to file dormant accounts if it hasn't traded? It must be nice living in your fairytale world where there's no fraud and everyone can be relied upon to pay their taxes if they're due, but otherwise be trusted that if they haven't paid, haven't filed, they don't owe anything and should be left alone.
It must be nice living in your fairytale world where there's no fraud
Do you think demanding VAT that isn't due, is fraud? Do you think businesses should on the same principle be allowed to estimate their VAT refunds?
..and everyone can be relied upon to pay their taxes if they're due, but otherwise be trusted that if they haven't paid they don't owe anything and should be left alone.
Funnily enough that's not a fairytale world, but the world we're meant to be living in. You know, the one where there's a presumption of innocence and we don't have to jump through hoops for inept bureaucrats. Perhaps your fairytale world is one where you can collect fines from people who fail to tell you nothing's happened.
But I guess we'll have to agree to disagree and this has gone waay O/T.
Do you think demanding VAT that isn't due, is fraud? Do you think businesses should on the same principle be allowed to estimate their VAT refunds?
Funnily enough that's not a fairytale world, but the world we're meant to be living in. You know, the one where there's a presumption of innocence and we don't have to jump through hoops for inept bureaucrats. Perhaps your fairytale world is one where you can collect fines from people who fail to tell you nothing's happened.
But I guess we'll have to agree to disagree and this has gone waay O/T.
Yes, that real-world where if you were eligible to pay tax/VAT then you have to TELL HMRC if that situation changes, but of course you think they're friggin psychic!
But even as a PAYE taxpayer the responsibility for paying the correct tax is you, not your employer.
It happened to me two years in a row - an employer of mine made a mistake in the way they declared my workplace benefits meaning I underpaid approximately £600 in income tax. This was definitely my responsibility, not theirs according to HMRC even though of course I wasn't the one calculating how much I owed.
Comments
That's true. Thanks for that, I'll see what she says Monday and then ask her.
Good luck
Let us know how it goes.
My husband has had several dealings with them due to his company wrongly stating what company car he had and his tax therefore being too high etc etc. He has always found HMRC very helpful.
Several times - i do the payroll for my small business. You have to remember that a) they aren't psychic and b) if you give them incorrect info then you'll get incorrectly assessed! The whole system has many faults but it goes better if you work with it, not against it....
I think you mean "shrunk".
"HMRC has cut about 37,000 jobs since 2005, the Public and Commercial Services Union said last year. HMRC plans to cut a further 10,000 jobs by 2015 to reduce costs."
http://www.accountingweb.co.uk/article/hmrc-loses-highest-number-staff-four-years/549454
I couldn't agree more.
And sometimes when you point out they've got incorrect info, they'll ignore it. Even though under the DPA they are required to ensure their information is accurate. Or when they send VAT demands to a company that hasn't traded in years, they get put out when you suggest trying to claim VAT when VAT isn't due is VAT fraud. But that's just one of the little quirks of HMRC. If they think you owe them money, they'll make up an amount and pursue it as a debt.
It's a neat system. Appeals are handled internally. Suggestions of copying MPs doesn't really help as by convention, MPs don't get involved in individuals tax matters. Then HMRC doesn't like taking people to court because they have a tendency to lose given their systems are so shambolic. And when their 'executives' are called before parliamentary committees, they're questioned on oath because the committee doesn't seem to trust them.
Yet HMRC has also been asking for powers to take money from people automatically whilst in dispute and introduce 'pre-death taxes'. And this is the same HMRC who gave sweetheart deals to large businesses costing taxpayers billions, and has their own property managed by an off-shore company.
But that's going O/T. I still suggest writing to HMRC explaining the facts of life and that the Uni made a mistake. HMRC may well ignore this because they're just interested in taking money. Don't worry about why the OP should end up responsible for someone elses mistake, that's just our tax system.
I rest my case with regard to your pathological hatred of HMRC, and have no intention of wasting my time replying to some of these absurd allegations but, to select an example, the emboldened part is simply untrue.
Reviews of HMRC decisions are conducted internally but appeals are handled by independent tax tribunals.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/hmrc-reviews-and-appeals-data
I'm wondering if perhaps you work for HMRC. Hence why you can't explain why it's trying to charge a non-trading/dormant company VAT and fining it for not using it's whizzy PAYE system. Then passing those fines and VAT demands to debt collectors even though no debt exists, which would be abundently clear if they tried taking it to court.
So again my advice to the OP would be to write explaining the amount is disputed and why. Otherwise as I said before, HMRC's automation systems will just churn out ever increasing demands.
No, but I've attended plenty of tax tribunals in a professional capacity (hint - see my profile).
Clearly I can't because I don't know the details of the case. I don't intend to speculate either.
Yup. Now stop and think about that process for a minute. Why would a dormant company need to de-register? If it's dormant, it's not doing anything and thus should not need to make VAT returns. If it starts trading again, then it would. Then there's the issue of estimates. VAT is only due on applicable transactions. If no transactions have occurred, no VAT is due. If the company made up a number and tried to reclaim it as VAT, HMRC would likely object. It's a dumb and inefficient process that could and should be changed.
And how, pray tell, are the HMRC to know it's dormant? You may have filed Dormant Company accounts with Companies House but unless you actually tell HMRC the status of a previously trading and VAT reg'd company has changed then what do you expect?? I think i said it earlier - they aren't psychic!! All your own doing IMO, seems you made plenty of - incorrect - assumptions, so - no sympathy, sorry.
Why do you assume psychic powers are necessary? You think HMRC has no ability to see records at Companies House? No psychic power needed there, just a bit of joined up public sector thinking. If the company starts trading again, then it can start paying VAT again. If it doesn't, then it's free to investigate. Why should a dormant company be compelled to de-register or waste time sending in nil returns though?
And why should HMRC be allowed to create ficticious VAT demands when if a company did the same thing, it would be prosecuted for fraud?
It is amusing though to see people trying to defend an inept bureaucracy that's allowed large businesses to get away with not paying billions though.
As it appears those whose responsibility it is to notify HMRC of such changes are clearly incapable of doing so - therefore they must assume HMRC are psychic... QED.
Your "argument" is holier than a sieve - you should have done something & you didn't, yet wish to place the blame elsewhere? Your own fault, no-one elses.
You really are exposing your ignorance. Companies are required to file accounts within 9 months of their year end. VAT returns are required every 3 months, so it could be over a year and a half before HMRC would be able to establish a company was dormant from its filed accounts. But really, can you imagine how much it would cost for HMRC to examine the filed accounts of every single company on the register to see if was dormant? Are they supposed not to chase any company for its VAT liability for 18 months just in case it's become dormant and the directors were too lazy or incompetent to inform them? Your attitude is ludicrous.
I've been otherwise occupied for much of this afternoon but it's good to see that the flag of rationality is still proudly fluttering in the breeze.
Keep up the good work, chaps. ;-)
You mean HMRC don't check filed accounts against their own records? No wonder it's a mess. Otherwise it should cost very little. Companies House only use a few tags for company status, and this being the 21st Century, HMRC doesn't need to send clerks to pore over paper records. Computers are clever like that. They can even talk to each other! Of course given HMRC's track record with IT projects, I'm perhaps being too optimistic here.
Call me old fashioned but the way things are supposed to work is if tax is due, it's paid. If it's not paid, then it's HMRC's job to figure out if it was due. If the company shows as dormant and not trading, could that be a hint that no VAT is due and demands for VAT are in error or fraudulent?
As is your love of traditional bureaucracy.
Do you think demanding VAT that isn't due, is fraud? Do you think businesses should on the same principle be allowed to estimate their VAT refunds?
Funnily enough that's not a fairytale world, but the world we're meant to be living in. You know, the one where there's a presumption of innocence and we don't have to jump through hoops for inept bureaucrats. Perhaps your fairytale world is one where you can collect fines from people who fail to tell you nothing's happened.
But I guess we'll have to agree to disagree and this has gone waay O/T.
Yes, that real-world where if you were eligible to pay tax/VAT then you have to TELL HMRC if that situation changes, but of course you think they're friggin psychic!
But even as a PAYE taxpayer the responsibility for paying the correct tax is you, not your employer.
It happened to me two years in a row - an employer of mine made a mistake in the way they declared my workplace benefits meaning I underpaid approximately £600 in income tax. This was definitely my responsibility, not theirs according to HMRC even though of course I wasn't the one calculating how much I owed.