Taxman steps up scrutiny of online traders [Archive]

Mark Grant

14-06-2011, 08:03

This was also mentioned over 5 years ago, still no change at ebay though.:doh:

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/tax/income/article.html?in_article_id=403156&in_page_id=77

There must be tens of thousands of ebay sellers not paying tax on their sales, ebay wont care as long as they are collecting seller fees and it will be impossible for the HMRC to stop it.

People dont realise that they need to inform HMRC within 3 months of starting trading on ebay etc.

some links:

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/tax-evasion/index.htm

http://www.kinsellatax.co.uk/index.php?mact=News,cntnt01,detail,0&cntnt01articleid=190&cntnt01origid=68&cntnt01returnid=68

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=1565599

http://www.bytestart.co.uk/content/24/24_6/start-an-ebay-business.shtml

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=1618479

http://www.startups.co.uk/what-counts-as-self-employed_1.html

-

nat8808

14-06-2011, 11:24

"HM Revenue and Customs is targeting consumers with a large number of 'feedbacks' to see how much money they make from the site."

That will be long-term buyers then too...??

I've always wondered at what point do personal sales become taxable, both officially (probably at any point a profit is made!) and practically speaking.

There must be people who sell off loads of posessions simply as a down-scale or a sell off of collections of gear they've had for years.

Does selling at a price higher than originally paid but much much lower than an inflation adjusted original price still count as profit?

Macca

14-06-2011, 12:26

"Does selling at a price higher than originally paid but much much lower than an inflation adjusted original price still count as profit?

Yes, because you are receiveing payment in inflation adjusted pounds.

All this will do is hike up prices and I doubt very much that HMRC are so efficient that this will be a net revenue earner after the costs of tracking and enforcement are taken into account.

Just another attempt to force the little guy out while the big players continue get away with paying nothing

worthingpagan

14-06-2011, 14:25

seems to me the govt would be better employed targetting the online paedophiles than worrying about whether Mrs Brown from #42 made a profit selling her used garters on ebay :rolleyes:

montesquieu

16-06-2011, 15:25

If people are running businesses and not paying taxes they are ripping off everyone else who play the game fairly. Clearly they won't waste time with small-scale hobbyists but there are people out there selling dozens if not hundreds of items a week and not paying the taxes/providing the legal information they would have to do if they were running a legitimate business.

It's a perfectly proper thing to go after these people. I was ripped off by a dodgy ebay car dealer once and I for one would have been delighted to see HMRC go in and shut down his grubby operation.

Alex_UK

16-06-2011, 20:18

If people are running businesses and not paying taxes they are ripping off everyone else who play the game fairly. Clearly they won't waste time with small-scale hobbyists but there are people out there selling dozens if not hundreds of items a week and not paying the taxes/providing the legal information they would have to do if they were running a legitimate business.

It's a perfectly proper thing to go after these people. <snip>

I agree 100% Tom - most of them are probably claiming benefits as well... :steam:

montesquieu

16-06-2011, 20:23

I agree 100% Tom - most of them are probably claiming benefits as well... :steam:

I know I have to queue up behind some of them in the local post office when I sell a bit of kit ... there's a horror of a woman locally goes out (just about every day of the week) in her jimjams with it all spilling out all over the place, then takes over the village post offiice for an hour while she sends a huge sack full of small packages recorded delivery ... you can just bet she is on a full whack of benefits and doesn't pay a bean ....

Macca

17-06-2011, 08:10

I know I have to queue up behind some of them in the local post office when I sell a bit of kit ... there's a horror of a woman locally goes out (just about every day of the week) in her jimjams with it all spilling out all over the place, then takes over the village post offiice for an hour while she sends a huge sack full of small packages recorded delivery ... you can just bet she is on a full whack of benefits and doesn't pay a bean ....

Maybe so but it doesn't pay to jump to conclusions about people. I have a day of work today and when I go to the supermarket later on I will be in tracky bottoms, old sweatshirt and a raggedy old jacket, trainers and unshaven. If you are behind me in the queue when I pull out a wad of twenties to pay the bill (I like to pay cash) what are you going to think - 'look at this dosser in Sainsburys 2 o'clock on a weekday with a wad of cash in his pocket'

See what I mean?

Anyway if she is claiming and earning on the side thats a matter (in the first instance) for the DWP not HMRC. She could probably afford the tax if they asked her for it.

montesquieu

17-06-2011, 08:16

Maybe so but it doesn't pay to jump to conclusions about people. I have a day of work today and when I go to the supermarket later on I will be in tracky bottoms, old sweatshirt and a raggedy old jacket, trainers and unshaven. If you are behind me in the queue when I pull out a wad of twenties to pay the bill (I like to pay cash) what are you going to think - 'look at this dosser in Sainsburys 2 o'clock on a weekday with a wad of cash in his pocket'

See what I mean?

Anyway if she is claiming and earning on the side thats a matter (in the first instance) for the DWP not HMRC. She could probably afford the tax if they asked her for it.

I see her almost every time I try to post something in the afternoon (I can also look like a bit of a dosser when 'working from home' but I'm sure neither of us smell quite as bad as this).

Macca

17-06-2011, 08:22

I see her almost every time I try to post something in the afternoon (I can also look like a bit of a dosser when 'working from home' but I'm sure neither of us smell quite as bad as this).

:lolsign:

if I took a whole week off work I might be able to work up something of a musk:eek: But I never do 'cause I would have too much work piled up when I got back:(

Yep the local post office is often a good place to go if you want to re-assure yourself about the standard of your personal hygene:) I'd also recommend the Council Offices reception area for this purpose.

chelsea

19-06-2011, 16:21

I'd personally rather see the tax man spending his time and effort on the real fat cats at the top first.

Reid Malenfant

19-06-2011, 16:38

I'd personally rather see the tax man spending his time and effort on the real fat cats at the top first.
I'm sure just about everyone would agree apart from those up top :eyebrows: As it is they have the money to buy the top flight accountants that get them off the hook :rolleyes:

simon g

19-06-2011, 20:54

I, like many others, work extremely hard to make a living. I have to pay tax ~ and quite a lot of it. It annoys me intensley when I see those who are 'playing the system' ~ they expect to enjoy all the benfefits (roads, schools, police force, etc, etc), but don't want to contribute. As more and more people take the 'sod everyone else, I'm in it for myself' attitude, then the worse it gets for the ever decreasing number who have to pay ever more.

Any move to catch tax dodgers is OK by me, wherever they may be.

I have an idea. Not exactly an original one, but one to think about.

It'd be almost impossible to have a tax system that would catch all and ensure that all pay up. So, why not abolish all direct taxation and move it to indirect taxation? That way, those who consume most would pay most. It would seem sensible to assume that those with more money would buy more and thus pay more tax. It would be impossible to avoid/evade the tax if you wanted to spend any of your money. Clearly, there could be a zero, or low, rate for essentials.

Can't see it happening, though.:(

Reid Malenfant

19-06-2011, 20:59

I think this already happens, it's called VAT :rolleyes:

BTH K10A

19-06-2011, 21:03

It'd be almost impossible to have a tax system that would catch all and ensure that all pay up. So, why not abolish all direct taxation and move it to indirect taxation? That way, those who consume most would pay most. It would seem sensible to assume that those with more money would buy more and thus pay more tax. It would be impossible to avoid/evade the tax if you wanted to spend any of your money. Clearly, there could be a zero, or low, rate for essentials.

Can't see it happening, though.:(

It won't. Some of the fat cats will vote against any proposed change in law that would hit them in the pocket.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2005420/How-Lords-EU-payroll-blocked-Europe-referendum.html

simon g

19-06-2011, 21:12

I think this already happens, it's called VAT :rolleyes:

Yes, that's one indirect tax, but we have both indirect and direct taxes at present.

I mean abolish all direct taxation ~ income tax, NI, etc. All tax would be on any goods/services purchased.

Seems fairer, much easier/cheaper to administrate, almost impossible to evade/avoid. Being a more equitable, fairer system is probably why it will never happen. To many vested interests in the status quo.

Reid Malenfant

19-06-2011, 21:21

Yes, that's one indirect tax, but we have both indirect and direct taxes at present.

I mean abolish all direct taxation ~ income tax, NI, etc. All tax would be on any goods/services purchased.

Seems fairer, much easier/cheaper to administrate, almost impossible to evade/avoid. Being a more equitable, fairer system is probably why it will never happen. To many vested interests in the status quo.
I'm not sure it would make a lot of difference, with a big income you can afford the best accountants, they'll find a way of deducting a load of money off of your tax bill, or they wouldn't be in existance ;)

Perhaps i am mistaken :scratch:

chelsea

19-06-2011, 21:29

simon g

20-06-2011, 05:31

Perhaps i am mistaken :scratch:

You miss the point, Mark.

There wouldn't be tax bills. You just pay a high rate of tax on everything you buy. No tax returns.

This is now well off topic, so I'll leave it there :)

AlexM

20-06-2011, 10:33

Tax evasion is rife, and I think that many people are tacitly or overtly complicit. How many people would refuse a price reduction on jobs 'done for cash' from builders and others? - some, but not many in my experience.

eBay traders working under the radar should be declaring their income, just as I would for my non-PAYE income. I think it is quite appropriate for HMRC to carry out and publicize enforcement campaigns where tax evasion percomes material to protect the interests of all tax payers.

Another area where I'd like to see some action is for personal tutors who run 11+ classes 'cash in hand'.... a quick back of a fag packet calculation estimated that one tutor I was using was probably pocketing around 80k a year (!!!). They may have been declaring all of that income, but then again..

Dr Bunsen Honeydew

20-06-2011, 11:00

Macca

20-06-2011, 12:00

Tax evasion is rife, and I think that many people are tacitly or overtly complicit. How many people would refuse a price reduction on jobs 'done for cash' from builders and others? - some, but not many in my experience.
..

I always pay tradesmen in cash - why should either of us give a penny more to the Govt then we need to? They will only squander it. They have just given £6 Billion out in international aid - to India (who has a £1.5 Billion space programme) and to Pakistan (who have just spent 250 million on fighter jets and submarines -Chinese made of course).

What I'd like to see is everyone refusing to pay tax until we can be confident it won't be spunked up against the wall the second we hand it over.

AlexM

20-06-2011, 13:52

Macca,

I'm far less worried about the proportion of my taxes being spent on international aid than the amount being sunk into the public sector pension liability black hole!. This unexploded bombshell has been ticking since at least 1998 - I'm amazed that there isn't a huge public outcry at the scale of the liability, and wider understanding of the implications for UK Plc...

Regards,
Alex

worthingpagan

20-06-2011, 20:41

What we really need is a bit of anarchy in the UK! Tax, in any form, either direct or indirect is pure theft. It's been going on for thousands of years and it's about time it was stopped :guns:

Neil McCauley

20-06-2011, 20:59

What we really need is a bit of anarchy in the UK! Tax, in any form, either direct or indirect is pure theft. It's been going on for thousands of years and it's about time it was stopped :guns:

Well yes, it’s a view and yes from time to time rather attractive to me. By sheer coincidence, last Thursday I had cause to reflect on this precise view. The liter of fluid that was being drip-fed into my arm cost the NHS £3k. And it cost the same if not more for everyone in my group, and every other group throughout the UK receiving this life-saving technology on a daily basis. This single process (part of a larger regime) for me will cost the NHS £18k.

Try as I may I cannot envisage an anarchist state being benign enough to consider such matters to be of importance. Holding a gun, both metaphorically and literally to the suppliers of these fluids is I feel unlikely to produce a happy outcome.

The unpalatable truth is that when I was young and fit (a tarmac spreader in fact) I was of an anarchistic state of mind. I was I thought tougher than the rest. And in many instances I most certainly was. Now, both older and wiser and confronting a potentially rapidly reducing lifespan, curiously I’m of a different view.

nat8808

24-06-2011, 01:46

In Greece they reckon about 50% of the economy is like that, which is why they have taken to the streets. Forget all the fine sentiments about future generations, it is human greed and self preservation like most things i.e. human nature.

Have to completely disagree here - all of Greece's economic woes can be accounted for and traced back to government agreements and dealings with investment banks to help them get into the Euro zone back in 2000.

It's all based on fraud by both those banks and also partly by successive governments.

As soon as it looked like economic collapse was on the cards from back in 2008/9, the very same banks have been again commiting fraud (naked shorts on derivatives for example) or by speculating against Greece with massive leveraged positions by borrowing at 0 zero interest rates so to encourage that collapse and profit greatly from it.

Just this weekend many private investers were gathering in Athens, getting in line to grab as much of Greece's assets as they can for their own gain.. It's one big country rape, with Greece having been "groomed" some 11 years ago. Those investors have been quoted as saying (I paraphrase) "[the Greek collapse] is the greatest wealth opportunity I've had in my life!" .. Steve Forbes the publishing giant was one attendee looking to buy Greek assets for pennies on the dollar for example.

Any zenophobic utterings you may hear and unwittingly repeat is just a case of divide and conquer before they then reach the richer countries like Spain, Italy and the UK. THAT is why people are in the streets, it's a matter of survival! Not because they're lazy, corrupt, greasy, sleazy wops (or whatever the racial slur is for Greeks).

This countrywide, economic rape has been done before in South America (read "Confessions of an Economic Hitman" for example) and it's happening now in Europe.

StanleyB

24-06-2011, 05:46

Have to completely disagree here - all of Greece's economic woes can be accounted for and traced back to government agreements and dealings with investment banks to help them get into the Euro zone back in 2000.
There was a good online discussion on he Guardian website a few days ago, which highlighted many of the reasons why Greece is in trouble. Your view that all of Greece's troubles can be traced back to 2000 wouldn't have held up in that discussion.

Things that were highlighted:
1. An army even bigger than that of the UK, with a population that's 1/6th of ours.
2. A massive amount of public sector workers who are also very inefficient.
3. Cash sales that cannot be traced and no VAT declared.
4. Early retirements in some sectors that start at 50.

Effem

24-06-2011, 09:07

As far as I was aware the Greeks were never too happy about paying taxes. Correct me if I am wrong, but I seem to recall endless houses in Greece with the bare unfinished shell of a room perched on the roof of new houses because the government had imposed a tax on all new house builds which was due when they were finished, hence the "unfinished" room on the roof and the tax was never paid.

AlexM

24-06-2011, 10:17

Nat8808,

I would agree that the banking industry is not a force for stability, and in many cases actively colludes in destabilising economies to create an opportunity for profit.

A nice summary of the South American and Asian debt crisis of the 90's was made by the BBC series 'watched over by machines of loving grace'.

It described the process of the IMF, sponsored by Goldmans and other US banking lobbyists effectively insisted on nationalisation of private debt, ostensibly to support the currency which then collapsed dramatically when the IMF loans were used to repay US private investors. Once this had happened, the currencies slumped dramatically with dire consequences for millions of people who were powerless to effect the decisions and outcomes. Their interests were not safeguarded in the slightest by the international community.

The trick worked then, and it seems to be working well now, both here and in the Eurozone. i'm amazed that we are all falling for it again!.

Regards,
Alex

Dr Bunsen Honeydew

24-06-2011, 10:22

Lets face it the world is full of Fffing crooks, some illegal and some legal and some politicians. What chance do the rest of us sheep stand, and yet it is us they want to fleece.

nat8808

24-06-2011, 15:24

There was a good online discussion on he Guardian website a few days ago, which highlighted many of the reasons why Greece is in trouble. Your view that all of Greece's troubles can be traced back to 2000 wouldn't have held up in that discussion.

Things that were highlighted:
1. An army even bigger than that of the UK, with a population that's 1/6th of ours.
2. A massive amount of public sector workers who are also very inefficient.
3. Cash sales that cannot be traced and no VAT declared.
4. Early retirements in some sectors that start at 50.

I was playing devils advocate I guess quite strongly to make a point.

But still, 2, 3 and 4 would apply in the UK too (I guess it depends to what degree) and with 1, we no doubt spend much more per capita due to our involvement in so many wars and invasions! I'm sure also that if there was such a tax on new buildings that could be circumvented easily then the Brits would do it too.

If tax isn't going to government then it still will be circulating in the greek economy in some way and get to government eventually, else it is in savings which would make banks stronger (which they're not) or somehow it is shipped directly out of the country.. The net result of not paying taxes directly is not going to be as large as you might think.

On the otherhand though, in one single action of Papandreou, one of his very first in power, some €26 billion was taken out of the country and handed to bankers and other insider buddies - he imediately sold off €1.3 billion in insurance against the countries default in 2009 when it was already obvious they were in trouble, and 6 months later those who now owned it saw its value soar to €27 billion. It seems quite obvious to those investigating that this was a 'sweetheart deal', a gift to either thank or pay-off banks etc who were close to Panpendreou. There are calls in the legal community to charge him with treason..