[֍Winp®oClean֍]

The reality is no one knows,  I think there is a lot of Scare  mongering going on

Me too.
HMRC barely has the capacity to hand the money out, never mind claw it back in!

[G Griffin]

Thankfully my Wife has a letter from her work  confirming dates and also that suspected covid was the reason....

For the second one?

[G Griffin]

The reality is no one knows,  I think there is a lot of Scare  mongering going on

Me too.
HMRC barely has the capacity to hand the money out, never mind claw it back in!

And they've little chance of assessing whether people have been adversely affected in monetary terms.
That's why they're not doing it.

[Rob.Hall]

First one Grif.
Not claiming second.
Most work which was on hold is now back on.
Am now doing a, 'wait and see what happens next,' approach to see if I claim second..

[G Griffin]

First one Grif.
Not claiming second.
Most work which was on hold is now back on.
Am now doing a, 'wait and see what happens next,' approach to see if I claim second..

I don't think there'll be any comebacks on the first one, Rob.
Have you not had childcare problems for the second one?

[Rob.Hall]

All grown up...
On grandchildren now 😁

[AuRavelling79]

Okay; yet again let's look at what the dotGOV website says. Here you go - cut and pasted.


Adversely affected is typically when your business has experienced lower income or higher costs due to coronavirus.

HMRC expects you to make an honest assessment about whether your business has been adversely affected. There is no minimum threshold over which your business’ income or costs need to have changed.

If you make a claim for the Self-Employment Income Support Scheme grant you’ll have to:

keep records of how and when your business has been adversely affected
confirm to HMRC that your business has been adversely affected by coronavirus

And here's what the site says about the records you need to keep.

You should keep any evidence that your business has been adversely affected by coronavirus at the time you made your claim, such as:

business accounts showing a reduction in turnover or increase in expenditure
confirmation of any coronavirus-related business loans you have received
dates your business had to close due to lockdown restrictions
dates you or your staff were unable to work due to coronavirus symptoms, shielding or caring responsibilities

Published 17 August 2020

[G Griffin]

Okay; yet again let's look at what the dotGOV website says. Here you go - cut and pasted.


Adversely affected is typically when your business has experienced lower income or higher costs due to coronavirus.

HMRC expects you to make an honest assessment about whether your business has been adversely affected. There is no minimum threshold over which your business’ income or costs need to have changed.

If you make a claim for the Self-Employment Income Support Scheme grant you’ll have to:

keep records of how and when your business has been adversely affected
confirm to HMRC that your business has been adversely affected by coronavirus

And here's what the site says about the records you need to keep.

You should keep any evidence that your business has been adversely affected by coronavirus at the time you made your claim, such as:

business accounts showing a reduction in turnover or increase in expenditure
confirmation of any coronavirus-related business loans you have received
dates your business had to close due to lockdown restrictions
dates you or your staff were unable to work due to coronavirus symptoms, shielding or caring responsibilities

Published 17 August 2020

How do you show a reduction in turnover because of co-vid?

[Shrek]

Reduction in turnover for the 2nd grant? Everyone’s jam packed with worked since lockdown finished

[dd]

More to the point how can you justify the second grant if you have not had a significant reduction in turnover. The onus will be on us to prove/justify ourselves to HMRC.

It should be relatively easy for HMRC to come after the self employed who do not provide what is deemed a reasonable level of proof their income has suffered significantly.

[dd]

The reality is no one knows,  I think there is a lot of Scare  mongering going on

Me too.
HMRC barely has the capacity to hand the money out, never mind claw it back in!

And they've little chance of assessing whether people have been adversely affected in monetary terms.
That's why they're not doing it.

They will simply judge it on income/profit. The onus is on us to provide whatever proof the HMRC deem reasonable to justify the second grant.

[G Griffin]

The reality is no one knows,  I think there is a lot of Scare  mongering going on

Me too.
HMRC barely has the capacity to hand the money out, never mind claw it back in!

And they've little chance of assessing whether people have been adversely affected in monetary terms.
That's why they're not doing it.

They will simply judge it on income/profit. The onus is on us to provide whatever proof the HMRC deem reasonable to justify the second grant.

No, they won't.
I'll say it again, you could have an increase in income/profit and still be entitled to the grant. The reasons for the affects on income/profit are what the onus is on.

[Shrek]

The reality is no one knows,  I think there is a lot of Scare  mongering going on

Me too.
HMRC barely has the capacity to hand the money out, never mind claw it back in!

And they've little chance of assessing whether people have been adversely affected in monetary terms.
That's why they're not doing it.

They will simply judge it on income/profit. The onus is on us to provide whatever proof the HMRC deem reasonable to justify the second grant.

No, they won't.
I'll say it again, you could have an increase in income/profit and still be entitled to the grant. The reasons for the affects on income/profit are what the onus is on.

The quote from Hmrc shows ‘a reduction in turnover’ not increase

[G Griffin]

The reality is no one knows,  I think there is a lot of Scare  mongering going on

Me too.
HMRC barely has the capacity to hand the money out, never mind claw it back in!

And they've little chance of assessing whether people have been adversely affected in monetary terms.
That's why they're not doing it.

They will simply judge it on income/profit. The onus is on us to provide whatever proof the HMRC deem reasonable to justify the second grant.

No, they won't.
I'll say it again, you could have an increase in income/profit and still be entitled to the grant. The reasons for the affects on income/profit are what the onus is on.

The quote from Hmrc shows ‘a reduction in turnover’ not increase

But you don't have to have had a reduction in turnover to claim it. You could have had an increase in turnover and be eligible to claim it.
It's not about how your income has been affected but how you have been affected. But an affect on you could affect your income.
Simple, eh?  .

[KS Cleaning]

I’m with Griff on this one, there will be many reasons why you could show a bigger turnover than the previous year but still be able to prove that your business has been adversely affected by Coronavirus.

[Arnold Palmer]

Get it claimed and move on.

[G Griffin]

I’m with Griff on this one, there will be many reasons why you could show a bigger turnover than the previous year but still be able to prove that your business has been adversely affected by Coronavirus.

Correct.
We're window cleaners. There are lots of variables to turnover and what defines our turnover? They are basing it on our last three years earnings. There could be massive differences in those years. And when the period of the claim is so short- 14th of July 'til the end of August it's difficult to ascertain what your turnover could have been; considering weather and holidays, too.
It's almost impossible for HMRC to use income to determine whether the self employed have been adversely affected by the virus or not.

[The Jester of Wibbly]

I think you're just trying to convince yourselves, but go for it if you think your correct.

The Furlough scheme is already raising suspicion of fraud.  It won't be long before they move to the self employed, which will anger the tax payer.

I read somewhere bank statements may be asked to support you claim in the next tax return to prove your quarters takings have dropped adversly. 

https://www.express.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/1326420/furlough-scheme-claim-hmrc-penalty-fraud-rules

[G Griffin]

I think you're just trying to convince yourselves, but go for it if you think your correct.

The Furlough scheme is already raising suspicion of fraud.  It won't be long before they move to the self employed, which will anger the tax payer.

I read somewhere bank statements may be asked to support you claim in the next tax return to prove your quarters takings have dropped adversly. 

https://www.express.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/1326420/furlough-scheme-claim-hmrc-penalty-fraud-rules

Quarters takings?
The period for the second grant is the 14th of July to the 31st of August. About seven weeks. A gap in that seven weeks might not be enough for a drop in a quarters takings. And how do you define a quarters takings? A quarter from 2016 might be different from a quarter in 2018. A winter's quarter or a summer's quarter? A quarter when a plumber is in work or a quarter when he/she wasn't in work?
And and what about the seven weeks that we're not allowed to claim for? Say you spent the whole of June in bed with co-vid but that doesn't count.
It's doesn't depend on earnings.

[Arnold Palmer]

I think you're just trying to convince yourselves, but go for it if you think your correct.

The Furlough scheme is already raising suspicion of fraud.  It won't be long before they move to the self employed, which will anger the tax payer.

I read somewhere bank statements may be asked to support you claim in the next tax return to prove your quarters takings have dropped adversly. 

https://www.express.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/1326420/furlough-scheme-claim-hmrc-penalty-fraud-rules

Do not, I repeat DO NOT get tax advice from the daily express. Their tax advice skills are akin to their long range weather reporting, sensationalist nonsense.

While we're at it, don't get your tax advice from a bunch of window cleaners on the internet whom you've never met.

Get it claimed, if they make you pay it back, they make you pay it back.