+- The UK Babe Channels Forum (https://www.babeshows.co.uk)
+-- Forum: Other Adult Websites (/forumdisplay.php?fid=194)
+--- Forum: Personal Fan Sites (/forumdisplay.php?fid=395)
+--- Thread: VAT on Digital Platforms (/showthread.php?tid=81469)
RE: VAT on Digital Platforms - ShandyHand - 19-07-2020 18:34
(19-07-2020 16:55 )marlowe Wrote:(19-07-2020 16:38 )ShandyHand Wrote: Who decides who is the priority to be pursued for money?
The law decides.
No it doesn't. The law says nothing about who, of those potentially in breach, they should go after first. I'm not having a go. It was a straight forward question to see if anyone had any insight into practical prioritising based around resources and manpower available. Wouldn't they prioritising the most flagrant (most money) breaches first? The average tax payer would expect that would they not? Or is it a case of the lowest hanging fruit?
RE: VAT on Digital Platforms - tony confederate - 19-07-2020 21:52
They don't have to go after anyone first. HMRC isn't one single unit. It has different teams (departments) which work on different areas, small business, large business, general tax payers, wealthy tax payers etc.
RE: VAT on Digital Platforms - lovebabes56 - 20-07-2020 06:48
Yet the girls are classed as self employed are they not? So would that have some bearing on their tax code?
RE: VAT on Digital Platforms - The Silent Majority - 20-07-2020 07:50
(19-07-2020 18:34 )ShandyHand Wrote:(19-07-2020 16:55 )marlowe Wrote:(19-07-2020 16:38 )ShandyHand Wrote: Who decides who is the priority to be pursued for money?
The law decides.
No it doesn't. The law says nothing about who, of those potentially in breach, they should go after first. I'm not having a go. It was a straight forward question to see if anyone had any insight into practical prioritising based around resources and manpower available. Wouldn't they prioritising the most flagrant (most money) breaches first? The average tax payer would expect that would they not? Or is it a case of the lowest hanging fruit?
Bringing the girls into this is a complete red herring. This is nothing to do with the girls.
Those that don't meet the threshold, and aren't registered, aren't liable for VAT. End of.
For those that are registered, it's up to them to keep their own house in order. And I haven't seen anything that indicates any of them haven't.
This is about the digital platforms. The idea that HMRC would go down this road just to try and catch out one or two self employed sole traders is laughable.
RE: VAT on Digital Platforms - ShandyHand - 20-07-2020 12:37
^My question had moved away from the babes. In fact it was barely about this thread's topic. I was just curious as to prioritising generally. To bring it back to the topic I could ask instead why those that seem to be knowledgable here think it has it taken four or five years, or whatever it is, to pull OF into line?
RE: VAT on Digital Platforms - bigglesworth - 01-08-2020 21:26
I'm more interested to know why some of the platforms are still not charging VAT, given that they must know what happened with OnlyFans.
RE: VAT on Digital Platforms - HannahsPet - 03-08-2020 10:10
is it because they are not UK based ?
RE: VAT on Digital Platforms - FanofCamilla - 04-08-2020 07:48
Admire Me are UK based - I did ask them but they ignored my email.
It doesn't matter where they are based, it's payable in whatever EU country that something is sold in
RE: VAT on Digital Platforms - marlowe - 05-08-2020 20:05
Yes you're right, it shouldn't matter where they are based. It's where the customer is based that matters.
RE: VAT on Digital Platforms - DB83 - 06-08-2020 00:02
(20-07-2020 12:37 )ShandyHand Wrote: ^My question had moved away from the babes. In fact it was barely about this thread's topic. I was just curious as to prioritising generally. To bring it back to the topic I could ask instead why those that seem to be knowledgable here think it has it taken four or five years, or whatever it is, to pull OF into line?
I'm probably as knowledgeable as any in the forum since my occupation took in in direct contact with HMRC on a daily basis.
If they were aware of the law (and ignorance is no defence) they could have been badly advised or not even have sought out proper advice as to what part of the charge was liable to VAT. And they could have covered the vat on their own cut as an inclusive amount ie 1/6th or 20/(100+20)
VAT inspectors do not visit traders on a regular basis. It is not unknown for 4 or more years to pass between visits. But once an irregularity comes to light HMRC will raise an assessment based on what they think they have lost in the meantime and it is for the trader and/or their advisors to disprove that assessment.
And as for those that now cry foul, will they refrain from using the service ? I guess not just like did they stop eating fish and chips when VAT was first raised on these.