dark light

nJayM

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 196 through 210 (of 1,918 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: General Discussion #245620
    nJayM
    Participant

    Significant difference – a gratuity in a restaurant v paying tradesmen cash (no docs)

    Paying a gratuity in a restaurant is covered by HMRC and ideally all gratuities are taxable.

    In fact many restaurants ask that the gratuity if being paid by the customer be added at the end of the Debit/Credit Card authorisation.
    All gratuities are supposedly then shared out equally amongst eligible members of staff.

    If the payment of the gratuity is made in cash directly to the person providing the service the person receiving the gratuity must by HMRC law declare the total in their HMRC returns or by notifying the HMRC by letter.

    Many employers have been known to advise the HMRC that staff receive gratuities and that they as employer do not have an organised method of tracking the gratuities individual staff members receive. The employer usually will be advised by HMRC to notify all employees of the necessity to declare the gratuities they receive in annual form to HMRC in concurrence with Personal Income Tax returns or by letter.

    The payment of gratuities is relatively low in restaurants(unless like some billionaires the gratuity amounts to £1000s in exclusive clubs and restaurants) in comparison to the topic of this thread, of payments in cash to tradesmen unsupported by necessary documentation which usually collectively amounts to a lot more in comparison to gratuities in an average restaurant.

    Both gratuities and payment to tradesmen are fully covered on the HMRC web site and are covered by legislation.

    nJayM
    Participant

    Significant difference – a gratuity in a restaurant v paying tradesmen cash (no docs)

    Paying a gratuity in a restaurant is covered by HMRC and ideally all gratuities are taxable.

    In fact many restaurants ask that the gratuity if being paid by the customer be added at the end of the Debit/Credit Card authorisation.
    All gratuities are supposedly then shared out equally amongst eligible members of staff.

    If the payment of the gratuity is made in cash directly to the person providing the service the person receiving the gratuity must by HMRC law declare the total in their HMRC returns or by notifying the HMRC by letter.

    Many employers have been known to advise the HMRC that staff receive gratuities and that they as employer do not have an organised method of tracking the gratuities individual staff members receive. The employer usually will be advised by HMRC to notify all employees of the necessity to declare the gratuities they receive in annual form to HMRC in concurrence with Personal Income Tax returns or by letter.

    The payment of gratuities is relatively low in restaurants(unless like some billionaires the gratuity amounts to £1000s in exclusive clubs and restaurants) in comparison to the topic of this thread, of payments in cash to tradesmen unsupported by necessary documentation which usually collectively amounts to a lot more in comparison to gratuities in an average restaurant.

    Both gratuities and payment to tradesmen are fully covered on the HMRC web site and are covered by legislation.

    in reply to: General Discussion #245752
    nJayM
    Participant

    Surely this isn’t about Income Tax or VAT thresholds …

    Surely this isn’t about Income Tax or VAT thresholds … The payment method by cash is not illegal if supported by the documents in the post when I opened this thread.

    As a sole trader there are Income Tax returns to be filed and VAT returns (if providing services that are VAT chargeable to the client/customer) to be filed.

    The VAT threshold isn’t significant but the VAT Input Output equation or calculation definitely is.
    This can be reasoned out with HMRC by keeping good accounts or accurate/honest book keeping.

    A sole trader can become eligible for a VAT refund from HMRC in many cases if the VAT outgoings are higher than the legitimate VAT income on paid invoices

    It is easy to call the HMRC various names and yes it may seem that in our opinions many deserving and essential national resources are becoming drastically under funded and it is a spate of politicians from all parties that are responsible for the poor decisions.

    We must respect that the dwindling world economy and economic recessionary effect is putting additional burdens on the UK government.

    nJayM
    Participant

    Surely this isn’t about Income Tax or VAT thresholds …

    Surely this isn’t about Income Tax or VAT thresholds … The payment method by cash is not illegal if supported by the documents in the post when I opened this thread.

    As a sole trader there are Income Tax returns to be filed and VAT returns (if providing services that are VAT chargeable to the client/customer) to be filed.

    The VAT threshold isn’t significant but the VAT Input Output equation or calculation definitely is.
    This can be reasoned out with HMRC by keeping good accounts or accurate/honest book keeping.

    A sole trader can become eligible for a VAT refund from HMRC in many cases if the VAT outgoings are higher than the legitimate VAT income on paid invoices

    It is easy to call the HMRC various names and yes it may seem that in our opinions many deserving and essential national resources are becoming drastically under funded and it is a spate of politicians from all parties that are responsible for the poor decisions.

    We must respect that the dwindling world economy and economic recessionary effect is putting additional burdens on the UK government.

    in reply to: Needles, sandwiches, Amsterdam, Gate Gourmet and Delta #536271
    nJayM
    Participant

    I sincerely hope they have found out what happened

    I sincerely hope they have found out what happened.

    Whether the general public will ever know is another question.

    Reasons may be the obvious – cost cutting, bad maintenance (if machine malfunction/disintegration) or dare I say it sabotage by a low paid worker paid a lot by a rival of either the airline or the food supplier.

    in reply to: Needles, sandwiches, Amsterdam, Gate Gourmet and Delta #536289
    nJayM
    Participant

    It may unless commercial interests go ‘hush hush’ and buy customer silence

    It may unless commercial interests (ie Delta, Gate Gourmet, etc) go ‘hush hush’ and buy customer silence.

    Could there be a sensible explanation (although not comforting to passengers/consumers)?

    To produce Turkey Sandwiches (whether minced/mashed or sliced) there must be a commercial process.

    Double edged or double ended needles as described in the media reports are rare to find in the domestic market (hence if it is deliberate sabotage it must be a high spender behind it).

    It may be possible that a machine processing the turkey meat lost some of its ‘bits’ (for want of a better word – ie the double edge sharp needle like in cutters/slicers/mashers/shredders) and since minor in comparison to a major component failure did not cause the machine to trigger an alarm or shut down (depending how sophisticated the machines are at Gate Gourmet – Holland).

    Maybe the machine was discovered later or only after the Delta flights reported the passenger/s near injuries.

    I take no sides in this incident except to say that in the food chain in developed countries (ideally all countries) every aspect should be thought of especially when supplying airline meals since getting to a hospital A&E isn’t a few minutes by ‘Blue Light’ when one is a few thousand feet up and few hundred miles from land. (No please don’t start on how long that can take by conventional ambulance in UK while on ‘tera firma’)

    Ralph is absolutely correct when he says not everything should become a law suit but that is de facto in the US.

    in reply to: 2 RAF Tornados crash near LOSSIEMOUTH #2287569
    nJayM
    Participant

    RIP to those lost, condolences to those bereaved

    Sorry I am late with this post but I had no online access until now.

    Extremely sad for the RAF, and the entire Lossie site, 2 more aircraft lost but more importantly the tragic loss of life of trained RAF pilots.

    RIP to those lost (Blue Skies) and sincere condolences to those bereaved

    in reply to: General Discussion #251759
    nJayM
    Participant

    Obviously Alan you did not mean ‘This Old House’ by Shakin Stevens

    Obvviously Alan you did not mean ‘This Old House’ by Shakin Stevens.:D

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ln7m_1Om8Js

    But in the case of many of the ‘low quality’ (huge volume in reality) (easily shaken) structures in the USA ‘Shaky’s’ song is quite apt.:rolleyes:

    Tank or no tank a JCB equivalent will have to be used for the debris or many manual wheel barrow loads will have to be hauled away unless without anyone looking they torch the entire street (UK rioters and looters style) – to the horror of the ‘greenies’ ofcourse;)

    in reply to: The British Are Coming! #1843463
    nJayM
    Participant

    Obviously Alan you did not mean ‘This Old House’ by Shakin Stevens

    Obvviously Alan you did not mean ‘This Old House’ by Shakin Stevens.:D

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ln7m_1Om8Js

    But in the case of many of the ‘low quality’ (huge volume in reality) (easily shaken) structures in the USA ‘Shaky’s’ song is quite apt.:rolleyes:

    Tank or no tank a JCB equivalent will have to be used for the debris or many manual wheel barrow loads will have to be hauled away unless without anyone looking they torch the entire street (UK rioters and looters style) – to the horror of the ‘greenies’ ofcourse;)

    in reply to: General Discussion #252647
    nJayM
    Participant

    The ‘Big Iron’ (proprietary UNIX) backends that RBS have went in at Y2K

    The ‘Big Iron’ (Proprietary UNIX) ‘backends’ that RBS have went in at Y2K.

    If they did not at that time ‘afford’ or budget for duplicate test environments then I am aghast.

    All European banks worth their ‘salt’ were putting in duplicate mirrored sites at Y2K as the ‘mirroring’ became technically viable and affordable at that juncture.

    I know I did out in Europe and we never had a crisis such as RBS are facing at this moment.

    The investment was most likely made then by RBS/Nat West merger, may have been sacrificed by some ‘plonker’, ‘wan.er’, banker with mud for a brain to make supposed savings.

    Chuck all of them in the ‘tip’ and get the Treasury back it’s money in this austere time.

    in reply to: Banks owned by you (us) are boo boing big time #1844039
    nJayM
    Participant

    The ‘Big Iron’ (proprietary UNIX) backends that RBS have went in at Y2K

    The ‘Big Iron’ (Proprietary UNIX) ‘backends’ that RBS have went in at Y2K.

    If they did not at that time ‘afford’ or budget for duplicate test environments then I am aghast.

    All European banks worth their ‘salt’ were putting in duplicate mirrored sites at Y2K as the ‘mirroring’ became technically viable and affordable at that juncture.

    I know I did out in Europe and we never had a crisis such as RBS are facing at this moment.

    The investment was most likely made then by RBS/Nat West merger, may have been sacrificed by some ‘plonker’, ‘wan.er’, banker with mud for a brain to make supposed savings.

    Chuck all of them in the ‘tip’ and get the Treasury back it’s money in this austere time.

    in reply to: General Discussion #252653
    nJayM
    Participant

    The trouble is when rats are trapped and hung by their own petard they seek scapegoat

    When rats are trapped and hung by their own petard they seek scapegoats.

    Why not the ‘cheapo’ offshore wallahs?

    The rats are as you say above the decision makers who play with ‘fire’ with no technical/business acumen or credibility.

    Who in the world would authorise a technical upgrade on a ‘live’/production system so near a month end?

    Why was there no duplicate system (non ‘live’/production but a mirror image) where tests of new application software (to almost destruction) were being constantly carried out?

    The technology base at Gogarburn in Edinburgh is massive and IMO I feel they have used the excuse to offload the support on ‘cheapo’ offshore wallahs so that they can inflate their expenses in the financial statements.

    What a bunch of complete ‘wan.ers’ erm ‘bankers’ :diablo:

    Surely the customers have a right to a formal legal petition to the Government who are in theory majority owners.

    Sack em all, close the bank and return the money to the Treasury coffers where it belongs and repeat the same with the Lloyds TSB ‘wan.ers’:dev2:

    in reply to: Banks owned by you (us) are boo boing big time #1844045
    nJayM
    Participant

    The trouble is when rats are trapped and hung by their own petard they seek scapegoat

    When rats are trapped and hung by their own petard they seek scapegoats.

    Why not the ‘cheapo’ offshore wallahs?

    The rats are as you say above the decision makers who play with ‘fire’ with no technical/business acumen or credibility.

    Who in the world would authorise a technical upgrade on a ‘live’/production system so near a month end?

    Why was there no duplicate system (non ‘live’/production but a mirror image) where tests of new application software (to almost destruction) were being constantly carried out?

    The technology base at Gogarburn in Edinburgh is massive and IMO I feel they have used the excuse to offload the support on ‘cheapo’ offshore wallahs so that they can inflate their expenses in the financial statements.

    What a bunch of complete ‘wan.ers’ erm ‘bankers’ :diablo:

    Surely the customers have a right to a formal legal petition to the Government who are in theory majority owners.

    Sack em all, close the bank and return the money to the Treasury coffers where it belongs and repeat the same with the Lloyds TSB ‘wan.ers’:dev2:

    nJayM
    Participant

    ANA going for gold in replacing their 767s with 787s

    ANA going for gold in replacing their 767s with 787s using methods of ‘testing to destruction’.

    I guess ANA have taken the aspect of the 787 ‘flexing‘ in a literal sense and in some ways it will be good for Boeing if their launch customer irons out all the ‘creases’ (creating many obviously on the way):D.

    In flight music of this elk http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kM-y1a1oeCo

    If Boeing’s order book is to be taken as Gospel then ANA and JAL have already had deliveries of 787s upto May 2012 and they are in line for many more.

    ANA plan to replace their entire fleet of 767s with 787s.

    in reply to: 747 prices tumble #539878
    nJayM
    Participant

    I think breaking up older Jumbos is also a very lucrative industry

    I think breaking up older Jumbos is also a very lucrative industry.

    A DVD illustrating this is titled – Megastructures: 747 Demolition – A National Geographic Channel Production 2007 – Narrated by Rufus Jones.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2wd1HVhiRM

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2CmFrj8-dM

    It certainly isn’t a simple JCB wrecking melee.:D

Viewing 15 posts - 196 through 210 (of 1,918 total)