gemma hiles

GEMMA HILES free subscription click here

Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

VAT on Digital Platforms

Author Message
ShandyHand Offline
No Paywall Onlys - not babeshows
*****

Posts: 3,973
Joined: Mar 2009
Reputation: 65
Post: #101
RE: VAT on Digital Platforms
(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?

The idea that the babeshows "are not that deep" is driven by those that don't wish to acknowledge how much effective customer service and a consideration of psychology impacts users' future interactions.
(This post was last modified: 19-07-2020 18:44 by ShandyHand.)
19-07-2020 18:34
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
tony confederate Offline
Senior Poster
***

Posts: 435
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation: 15
Post: #102
RE: VAT on Digital Platforms
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.
19-07-2020 21:52
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
lovebabes56 Offline
The No.1 Teddy Bear!!
*****

Posts: 21,562
Joined: Jan 2011
Reputation: 68
Post: #103
RE: VAT on Digital Platforms
Yet the girls are classed as self employed are they not? So would that have some bearing on their tax code?

FERRARI & LOVEBABES, - BABE CHANNELS ULTIMATE COUPLE!!
CURRENT BS BABE FAVES :- MIGHTY MIKAELA WITT, DUCHESS DARELLE OLIVER, SULTRY STORMI MACK,
ALL - TIME BABE FAVES:- FERNANDA FERARRI , MELLIE D AND MIKAELA WITT PHOENIX KNIGHT[ DENNI TAYLA, SEXY STEVIE LOUISE
'ALWAYS LOOK ON THE BRIGHT SIDE OF LIFE" - LIFE OF BRIAN
20-07-2020 06:48
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
The Silent Majority Offline
Not any more
*****

Posts: 5,690
Joined: Apr 2011
Reputation: 92
Post: #104
RE: VAT on Digital Platforms
(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.
20-07-2020 07:50
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ShandyHand Offline
No Paywall Onlys - not babeshows
*****

Posts: 3,973
Joined: Mar 2009
Reputation: 65
Post: #105
RE: VAT on Digital Platforms
^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?

The idea that the babeshows "are not that deep" is driven by those that don't wish to acknowledge how much effective customer service and a consideration of psychology impacts users' future interactions.
(This post was last modified: 20-07-2020 12:40 by ShandyHand.)
20-07-2020 12:37
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bigglesworth Offline
Master Poster
****

Posts: 877
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation: 39
Post: #106
RE: VAT on Digital Platforms
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.
01-08-2020 21:26
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HannahsPet Offline
Posting Machine
*****

Posts: 21,193
Joined: Nov 2009
Reputation: 166
Post: #107
RE: VAT on Digital Platforms
is it because they are not UK based ?

True Supporter of Girls and Not Channels !!!!!

I always Keep getting accused of thinking the world revolves around me. . i know it doesnt . . it revolves around the sun which shines out of my arse !!!!!
03-08-2020 10:10
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
FanofCamilla Offline
Also a Ruby Ryder fan ;)
*****

Posts: 4,004
Joined: Mar 2011
Reputation: 43
Post: #108
RE: VAT on Digital Platforms
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

Favourite ladies: Camilla Jayne, Ruby Ryder, Beth Bennett, Mikaela Witt, Sammi Tye
04-08-2020 07:48
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
marlowe Offline
Posting Machine
*****

Posts: 1,263
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation: 48
Post: #109
RE: VAT on Digital Platforms
Yes you're right, it shouldn't matter where they are based. It's where the customer is based that matters.
05-08-2020 20:05
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DB83 Offline
Posting Machine
*****

Posts: 1,487
Joined: Dec 2009
Reputation: 17
Post: #110
RE: VAT on Digital Platforms
(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.
06-08-2020 00:02
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 



GEMMA HILES free subscription click here

gemma hiles