"SavetheUKCC" petition

[Michael Farthing]

Absolutely not. It's not sanctimonious at all. It's about respect for other people's rights to be themselves. It's about standing up to bullies who want to impose their own particular set of values on the rest of the world.

[Alan Kennedy]

I am not suggesting stoning the man to death. I am suggesting that if he wants to rave he can take the trouble to register and post of his own accord.

It is not what you say but how you say it that creates the effect.

[Nick Grey]

"Least possible work for teachers". That is none of Mike's business. It is Governors or trustees.
Whether local authority, academy, or private schools.
Qualification of EFAs accounts mainly on academy programme - & plenty of examples of inappropriate commercial activities.
Nice programme on 5live on last Sun morning.

Anyway how are the meetings going not that I can see any reason why HMRC are not going after the maximum they can under the penalty charge regime.

Perhaps Mike cannot post particularly if he also has no computer records.

[Alan Kennedy]

Anyway how are the meetings going not that I can see any reason why HMRC are not going after the maximum they can under the penalty charge regime.

Perhaps Mike cannot post particularly if he also has no computer records.

Most insolvency meetings are largely irrelevant to the world at large - the last one was to try and appoint a creditors commitee which means in practical terms that the Trustee has someone who can approve his fees rather than the general meeting of creditors or the courts. Unless Michael has very substantial assets and can pay the debt and Trustees fees in full (in which case why has he not done an IVA) I doubt whether the size of the HMRC bill will be of interest to anyone except the other creditors. The only reason why HMRC would not go after the full amount owed would be if the doctrine of "special relief" applied when they waive tax if it would be unconscionable to collect the tax. Para 3A(4) Schedule 1AB TMA 1970 refers for the geeks among you in respect of self assessment tax. As HMRC specifically says in their manual special relief will not apply to situations were the tax payer is negligent and, although aware of their responsibility to pay tax and to file returns on time, fails to act appropriately in relation to their tax affairs and ignores all communications sent to them I hold out little help for Mr Basman. I am not certain but I do not think the rules concerning "special relief" apply to VAT but i have seen cases where to be fair to other creditors they reduce their claim. This will not help Mr Basman though as it does not apply to except where the Bankrupts estate as a deficit. In summary the bankruptcy will run its course and the debt as determined by the tax tribunal is likely to stand.

[Carl Hibbard]

A couple of posts that added little to the topic were removed.

[Alex Holowczak]

"Least possible work for teachers". That is none of Mike's business. It is Governors or trustees.
Whether local authority, academy, or private schools.

I think you've misunderstood Mike's point.

When he talks about "least possible work for teachers", he means in respect to the amount of work it is for them to run the UK Chess Challenge, about which the governors or trustees will not be remotely interested. Given the extraordinary hours that British teachers keep during term time, there is a genuine shortage of teachers wanting to take anything on above classwork, because they simply don't have time to do it. So Mike tries to make UKCC as work-light as possible, because he thinks that is the best way to encourage schools to participate. "Least possible work for teachers" is the right principle for any optional school activity.

[JustinHorton]

So that's why he's never troubled himself with any VAT stuff? To make life a little easier for teachers?

[Alex Holowczak]

So that's why he's never troubled himself with any VAT stuff? To make life a little easier for teachers?

Paying for things with school funds will be well above a teacher's paygrade. More than likely the school office will pay for it, and I expect they will buy things and reclaim VAT on them all the time.

[JustinHorton]

Well yes (I work in schools and submit invoices to them, and it isn't teachers who deal with them) but this being so, what is the purpose or relevance of Mike Basman's supposed point?

[Alex Holowczak]

Well yes (I work in schools and submit invoices to them, and it isn't teachers who deal with them) but this being so, what is the purpose or relevance of Mike Basman's supposed point?

I don't think it is particularly relevant to VAT, but Nick Grey seemed to question the premise of keeping it easy for teachers, which I think is sound.

[John Moore]

I can't read through 490 posts (!) but I have just realised what it's about and I have read a couple of Alan Kennedy's posts which I agree with. Can someone summarise it in a page, please or something rather less, actually - not doing a tutorial now.

[John Moore]

Unless Mike owns his own house or, as Alan says, has other substantial assets, bankruptcy (if he is being made personally bankrupt) is unlikely to have a significant effect and if the business can be moved on, then that is probably going to be a very good thing.

[John Moore]

I started reading it and that's enough, thanks

[Nick Grey]

Teacher's have contracts that are not for others to vary (only Governors & Trustees). Pretty much been unlawful for 20 years. So it saves nothing.
Similarly trying to put VAT through schools is unlawful too.

Then again it has been my job for last 9-10 years which is also changing & picking up this for 3 inner lon boroughs.

Best of luck

[John Upham]

Similarly trying to put VAT through schools is unlawful too.

Nick,

I have failed to understand your message (again: it must be me!)

Are you saying that schools (state or independent) are not permitted to recover VAT from good or services purchased?

Does this mean that also that they cannot levy VAT on goods and/or services supplied?

Please clarify.