MY BIOGRAPHY. |
CHAPTER 44. Accountants and Taxmen. |
1. My accountant said things were not good but offered nothing by way of help or advice and seemed more concerned that I had stopped paying, having been forced into it by circumstances, pension contributions. I am suspicious he received a good commission by the way he insisted that I should pay as much as I could and as often as I could. Another time he was not even unduly concerned when I told him I had received a Tax Demand, for tax arrears, amounting to some £27,000 and that it was payable on demand. Forget it he said, we probably have a copy of it somewhere in the office and they do this every now and then and all we do is appeal and I would be paying for his time while he did. Something that never seems to get mentioned along with many other hidden charges, from the so-called professional and 'can't function without,' people. No wonder they are reluctant to get involved with the Revenue and the likes of them as they appear to provide accountants with some good and very lucrative sidelines that they can charge an arm and a leg for and the guy on the end has no come back and ends up paying whether he can afford it or not. Later, the accountant was proud to tell me that the appeal had been partially successful. The demand was reduced to £23,000 with no explanation, that I was aware of, and where in the first place I would have liked to have known, had this silly sum of money come from? Plucked out of thin air by silly sods on Planet Zogg? No, probably not, as even they would have been more realistic than the brainless wonders making the Inland Revenue rules. In between times, of course, the Collector, a different department from the Tax Assessor, wants their money. The accountant, bless him, said to pay him something if only to keep him quiet and get him off our backs until we sorted it all out. To get him off 'our' back and and 'we' sorted it out. I have never known anyone find something like this so funny and yet do so little about it and what's more where was I supposed to get the money from to get anyone of anyone's back? That's why most of them were on it in the first place. There was no money and the bloody accountant knew it. 2. Weeks later and following yet another appeal I found out that all this had arisen from an instigated, in-depth investigation, by the Inland Revenue, where my accountant had, at their request and without telling me, in order to save me unnecessary worry, as these things happened and seldom led to anything, submitted all my accounts which he had had for auditing. Don't worry, he assured me when challenged, they do this every now and again and all we do is go along, when they send for us, and answer all their questions. I was also advised, at the same time by my accountant that if there were any revenue experts in the LVA, then invite them along as it was all strength to our elbow. I did, but why? This was routine and seldom led anywhere and after all, my accountant had always submitted my accounts, on my behalf, agreed the result, informed me of how much tax I had to pay, waited for the Inland Revenue to submit their demand, and then sat back and let me pay it whist at the same time getting someone in his office to submit his own grotesque invoice for his minor input. Why did I now need strength at my elbow? Talk about guilty until you can prove your innocence. I always thought that under British Law you were innocent until proven guilty. Apparently not when it comes to dealing with such people as the Revenue. 3. It is not a subject that you would openly discuss outside your most intimate circle but to those I felt I could trust when I dropped hints that the Inland Revenue were sniffing round and playing silly buggers, the response I got was far from the one I would have liked. They suspect you of 'fiddling,' was the most common retort and all had heard of others that had done it and got caught and had either faced jail and/or back taxes of thousands. That was ridicolous! I had never had enough money or been in the position to fiddle and least of all the Inland Revenue. Sure enough, I had, over the years done the odd deal for cash and not recorded it. Had the odd job done for 'cash and thank you very much'? Paid the window cleaner out of the till and forgotten to book it on the odd occasion, because I was busy at the time. But you show me any businessman who has not and I will look him or her, directly in the face and call them a bloody liar. That is the way of the world. That is the way things go and applies to all businesses, from the smallest to the biggest and the further you are up the corporate ladder the worse it gets and right from the top, down through and including the Inland Revenue, to the very bottom, everyone knows that. How often do we hear of the top exective who has skimmed off thousands and not been cleaver enough to cover one of his moves and so gets carted off to jail without anyone ever being made fully aware of the total amount involved of for how long it has been going on? So why pick on the 'one man band,' right at the bottom? Because he is easy pickings and while the 'investigators' are fully occupied with him it saves them from having to rack their brains and go after the big boys who are often much too cleaver for them, beat them and so knacker up their statistics of how much revenue, per man hour involved, they have recovered for their masters, the government and also the small guy does not have the organisation to cover and hide it or the recourses to fight it when challenged? Or in my case the opportunity to do it, as there was barely enough cash about to pay my way let alone a surplus to skim off by whatever means. So I was at least confident that they would not get me on that score, as there was nothing to hide and therefore nothing for them to find. 4. We met on the day in question, the Accountant and the guy from the LVA, who quickly reminded me of how lucky I was to be a member of the organisation and have all this Free help made available to me. Free help at £165 a year and that was supposed to make me grateful and beholden? They didn't get anymore out of me after that, I will tell you. The accountant just smiled; his time was going on my Bill and all he did was ask me to say very little at the hearing and let them do all the talking; they had the experience. 5. We met this bloke, from the Inland Revenue Investigations Department and he took us into an empty room, apart from a desk and some hard, straight backed, chairs. He opened the proceedings by telling us he was the investigating officer and that everything was informal, at that stage, and that no records of the proceedings would be made apart from a few notes that he would make as reminders and for his own personal records. 6. Things were very complicated but he opened by saying that according to my records, my business had declined rapidly over the last five years and although he accepted some decline within the industry he could not accept the level that I was claiming and so the reason for his concern and why we were all there on that particular day. 7. The LVA guy opened the defence by asking if this bloke had any idea how much beer could be lost when cleaning pumps and lines and with an accepted decline in beer sales, at which he quoted some percentages and other waffle, what that represented in terms of percentage profit loss to me? The inspector said he could only accept, and had done so, although he believed they were overstated, the records of losses I made and submitted in my weekly 'Ullage Book.' That was the end of the LVA and their input. Useless bastard at £135 per member per year. 8. The Inspector prattled on and to me it all sounded irrelevant and just so much waffle and bullshit and I had had enough so I asked him if I could ask a question and at the same time ignored the light tap on my shin from my accountant. I wanted to know and asked, that if he was professional and my accountant was professional and all I did and was required to do by law, was keep records and submit them to the professionals and accept, due to my lack of professionalism in these matters, that they knew what they were doing and I paid a lot of money for that expertise, why they were unable to sort it all out and why we were there that day? His answer, 'Because I don't believe these records.' 'You don't believe me? You believe I am dishonest?' 'No, the records.' 'Then you should be talking to him,' indicating my accountant, 'and not me. He goes through my records and satisfies himself that they are true and accurate.' 'No, you, because we are dealing with your records.' When I then demanded to know specifically what was wrong with the records he insisted that they showed a decline that he could not accept. 'Then you have to prove that these records are not as they should be,' I replied. 9. He ignored that as he went on to say that my turnover and profit had gone up fairly consistently every year and agreed that it was only in line with the cost of living, when I interrupted. But then the last five years had seen a drop in turnover from around £170,000 a year to near £55,000. I agreed that was a fact and that is exactly what had happened and my records reflected that. He then wanted to know when and where I had been on holiday and almost laughed when I told him the truth and that I had not been on holiday for the past eleven years nor had I taken other than the odd day off. 10. You will just not believe his next approach. He produced my Daybook, in which the daily takings, from the till, were recorded and my main Ledger and asked why they were in different handwritting? Simple, my wife cashes up the till and enters the take in the Daybook. Ready for it? 'And how much does she lay aside for herself before she makes the entry? Enough for the hairdressers, some cloths, jewellery, a bit for a rainy day? (Yes, the difference between £170,000 and £55,000. My wife has 'sweetie' money of £115,000 per year and wants to avoid tax on it, and I haven't even noticed. You stupid prick.) 11. What stopped me going over that desk I will never know but I managed or I hope I managed to keep fairly calm as I explained that my wife does not do that or anything else, unless I tell her to, and that if she wanted to buy anything then she used her own private bank account into which a fixed amount was transferred from the business every month and which was clearly shown in the records. That reminded him to ask if there were any other accounts not shown in the business accounts, as the amount supposedly allocated to my wife did not amount to very much, if that indeed was the true amount transferred. I told him he could check that with the banks and he assured me that he had but when pressed accepted that he had not found anything but also claimed that was when he became increasingly concerned with the cash and the records relating to it. He was not amused when I suggested that it was a good job my wife was not with us as someone, probably suffering from a black eye, would be sending for the police at that point. 12. His next very sad and patheitc tack was to take about three, maybe four at the most from several hundred entries in the main Ledger, where he said the amounts concerned differed to the records in the Daybook claiming that demonstrated, to his satisfaction, my inability to keep accurate records. 'And not picked out by my accountant, just what have I been paying for, all this time?' 13. He was reluctant to show me the entries referred to at first but when I insisted he did, so that my accountant could see where he had been lax, do you know what he showed us? Coppers (pennies) in each case. Entries in one book, for say, £19-98 entered in the other book as £19-89. The poor sad bastard. The whole lot didn't amount to £1 in a £50,000 plus turnover yet he still insisted it proved inaccuracy that could demonstrate an attempt not to keep accurate and true records. 14. That was the final straw at which I told him, in no uncertain manner, that from that point on I would answer no more questions and that I resented the slur on my character and in particular that on my wife. 15. At that point he terminated the interview and said we would be hearing further. I prompted him not to include the LVA man, as he would no longer be involved in anything. 16. Outside the building the LVA bloke just walked away and I let him, while the accountant tried to tell me that he thought I had blown it and had played right into their hands by arguing and without proving that what he had said was not true. I then got exasperated at him, said I had to prove nothing as there was nothing to prove and that he, the inspector, had proved nothing either. He ignored my suggestion that perhaps a bit more concern on his part might have seen this coming and he might have nipped it in the bud. How I wasn't quite sure but I believed that I paid him and his people a lot of money to prevent this sort of thing. Apparently not, and found little solace in the accountants claim that it pays to say nothing as in the end these people, meaning the tax inspectors, are all powerful and what they decide stands. Bollocks, was the reply as I walked way. 17. A few days later I received a transcript of the interview and a revised assessment for £900. The inspector had assured us, at the informal interview, that he would only take a few notes for his records yet the transcript was word for word exactly what had been said and would have been impossible to write up so accurately later on. It even included the swear words I had used and reference to a black eye and could only have come from a recording. As for the revised assessment, there was no explanation other than after further assessment, following interview, the investigating officer had decided that a fair assessment for unpaid tax was £900 without any satisfactory explanation as to how he arrived at that. 18. The following day the accountant rang to congratulate me on how lucky we had all been and suggested that to get rid of this problem once and for all and for all our sakes (his he meant) I should pay the £900 straight away. He went very quiet when I said, £27,000 down to £23,000 and then down to £900 without any satisfactory explanation and that I had already sent off the appeal form, that came with the demand, to the Commissioners of the Inland Revenue to appeal against it and request an explanation for the £900 and between times I had no intention of paying anything to anybody. 19. When the appeal came back it told me a hearing would be held, in some offices somewhere out of town, in nine months time. In-between times the Collector came along threatening all sorts of legal action if I did not pay up. I didn't have it and ignored the helpful statement that said I would get it all back if my appeal was successful. All I did was take the advice of a Solicitor friend and a truly good friend he turned out to be in the end, and negotiated the very minimum they, the collectors, would accept as a weekly payent. They of course being the understanding and warm people that they are, wanted to include a sum for the actual tax still outstanding from the previous year. So a figure was set and I would trot off to their offices and pay a couple of weeks and then miss and wait for the letter and then go pay a bit more and that, thanks to good advice, did not keep them wholly off my back but it kept them at arms length. Anyhow they never got it in the end. Neither did the accountant get his outstanding fees, which I don't think he deserved to get as he turned out the way of so many, who as legal parasites in the system share the results of your hard work and success but then turn their backs on you when it is no longer there to be had, or you expect them to earn some of it, and that, among the rest, includes the VAT man. (Value Added Tax - as applied by Customs and Excise to prop up incompetent governments and fight wars.) 20. All these diverse and wonderful organisations who insist that all the information, held by them on you, is confidential and not passed from one agency to another. If you believe that then you will believe anything. How did the Vat man suddenly arrive at his assessment for underpayment and the Social Security at theirs shortly after and all based on a tax assessment of £900? Where did they get the £900 from? And what if, in the end, I didn't actually owe that amount? Tough, I suppose? 21. The Vat man was very clear in his assessment. With outstanding tax, spread over five years, being £900 then that would all be at a rate of 25p in the pound which would have come from £3,600 profit and the acceptable level of profit on turnover allowed by the Vat people on booze being at beween 47 and 49% that represented a turnover of, give or take, £7,500 and VAT at 17.5% equalled £1,312-50 and they would have it straight away as it was tax already collected by us on their behalf and the rules say that you hand it over straight away to them. I worked out some of the figures above using a calculator as I could not accurately remember the exact amounts involved, as was the case with the Social Security and their Class 4, graduated payments, but they still came along with their claim for back payment and went down the slot like all the rest when I didn't have it. 22. The electricity and gas companies had not been paid and whereas the gas company tried to make it easy for us both and agreed to accept monthly payments, the electricity company added to their own problems and agony, as well as to mine, by insisting they would only enter into an agreement to supply if I were to lodge a deposit of something like £2,000 in advance and against future payments. Silly sods or the people in the call centres, acting on their behalf, were. They were not getting paid because I did not have it so where the hell did they think I was going to get a deposit from? Of course they didn't get one and got, instead, a few quid thrown at them each time they sent 'the man' to cut off the supply, as the law states that if you make a payment, of any amount in excess of ten pounds, as it was then, then first of all you have acknowledged the debt and secondly you have tried to do something about it and therefore they have to back off for three months. Their bills had, in actual fact, been cut down considerably by me, for quite some time, by not putting on the flood-lights, at night, that illuminated the front of the building on the outside. I have since learned that the flood-lights on or off, outside a Pub, are a good indication of the state of the business. You know what I mean? Everything on and lit up like a Christmas Tree, just changed hands. Off, can't afford them. 23. Another poor guy who got a few quid thrown at him every time he turned up was the 'man' from the Town Hall who did his best to get me to pay my Community Charge (Poll Tax) and my Commercial Rates and Refuse Collection Charges that all seemed to almost double every year as the local authority ballsed up yet another of their financial years and continue to do so to this day. They would have gone down the slot a damned sight quicker than I did had they not been able to hike up their community charges and car parking fees at double and treble the rate of inflation, and to pay themselves vast salary increases, expenses and pensions schemes whilst cutting back, all the time, on public services. I would have done a lot better had I been able to sell my beer for a ridiculously inflated price, increased annually, cut the choice down to only one and then, backed by some sort of law, force everyone to drink vast volumes under threat of having old age pensioners suffer, children's education neglected, no police and a break down in law and order, refuse bins not emtied and cars and houses repossessed, if they did not. That is no different to what they do and then they criticise small business for not supporting them and paying above their fare share to support their incompetence. For those interested in snippets of useless information, they have put the Poll Tax (Community Charge) up by over 10% (nearer 12%) per annum for the last 10 years. If you were or are, in business could you put your prices up by that amount and survive? They can, and do and maybe you do if you are a subcontractor to them. I know of two partners in a very small building business who are now both millionairs thanks to Corporation Contracts, or so they claim. |
MY BIOGRAPHY. |
