CMEC and new calculations

Donedoingdebt

Found_true_love wrote: »

A change that keeps the status quo but reduces the NRP libility from 19% to 12%, someone has not thought that through have they?

Liability changes from 15% net to 12% gross.

Found_true_love

Donedoingdebt wrote: »

Liability changes from 15% net to 12% gross.

Ah but when one is SE and making a loss then thats the same:eek:

What I feared was that gross would actually mean from the invoiced totals

IE pwc can claim 12% of my total invoiced sales irrespective of what my allowable expenses were

RedSky

I presume (don't quote me, I may be wrong) that the concept is based on the money you "legitimately" earn and declare with the HMRC. If you declare you earn £100k or £10k then you pay a percentage. No ifs, no buts. And if you don't legitimately declare your income, its tax fraud.

speedster

that cant work with SE. it has to go on profits, not turnover.

you could turnover £3k a month and £1.5k of that could be materials, then you have tools, expenses etc. i don't think the csa wil know how to sort it (nothing new there then!)

besides, any half decent accountant can run rings round the csa anyway.

alwayspuzzled

Yes it 'reads' as what is declared to HMRC as profit/income this is a very different figure than invoiced totals which are turnover. For example if my you took my OH's figures from a couple of years ago and calculated based on our invoiced total you would be including all the wages of 10 subcontractors!

RedSky

Indeed. Individuals are financially responsible for children not businesses. Child maintenance is therefore a percentage of what an individuals earns, not what the business invoices.

Loopy_Girl

speedster wrote: »

besides, any half decent accountant can run rings round the csa anyway.

Tut tut...I do hope you are not condoning 'money blocking'...these men (or 't0ssers') are just the lowest and not thinking of the children:D

Surprised FTL isn't here preaching patronising sermons on how a person should act...actually not that surprised really;)

Found_true_love

Loopy_Girl wrote: »

Tut tut...I do hope you are not condoning 'money blocking'...these men (or 't0ssers') are just the lowest and not thinking of the children:D

Surprised FTL isn't here preaching patronising sermons on how a person should act...actually not that surprised really;)

Herm I wonder who FTL is?? oh and btw loopy if you hadn't realised it is actually my topic, so you are inviting me to comment on my topic, thank you I love you and Im sure you love me!!!!!

Did you want me to continue the fight against those females who are wimmin and yes I also recognise that there are men out there (t0ssers lol) who do NRP no favours.

So once more for the record here is my position

Wimmin (or alternatively sometimes PWC who are men or t0ssers) who block contact and try and get the CSA to fleece the NRP, give all rational (80% of the female poulation) women a bad name.

So we are left to deal with 10-20% of the wimmin because the women get the deal done and dont need the CSA, dont contact block and have a mature and reasonable approach to all things to do with thier children.

My situation, PWC (wommin) blocks contact goes to CSA, gets the wrong answer (much less than I was offering through a private agreement (she was being greedy thought she would get more through CSA) lol she didnt, then decided to ask for a variation, lifestyle inconsistent, undeclared income etc.

After 3 months of wrangling, I offered to wommin a deal where if she withdrew her variation I would stick with the previous assesment. She took this as weakness and pressed ahead, unfortunately for her I made a loss in the year that was in question and the variation was rejected, however because I had now declared my loss the CSA calculated a new figure of flat rate £5 to be back dated to the start of the variation application!!!!:eek::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

HOWEVER I still offered to the wommin a deal to negotiate a private agreement that also included separate discussions about more contact with the child with me family (my child continually asks to spend a bit more time with me so I am actually asking for more time on his behalf).

My offer included to pay at a higher rate than the CSA current assesment, she has only to meet me at the negotiating table and see what is on the table if she doesn't like it then she can leave, nothing ventured nothing gained eh?

What does she do?:mad: has the nerve to complain to my family that Im not making any payments for maintenance:eek: all she has to do is negotiate not block.

AND before any of you start to say if you can afford that then you can afford to pay anyway then syuff you, the money would have to come from either my parents (to support thier grandchild) or my wife.

All mum has to do to get the money is meet me and find a way through. She cant win, I am still seeing my child enough to make me and him happy, he woould like more time with me, when will mum take me up on the offer she is not thinking of his needs, and and the same time she can then take advantage of my wifes kind offer to help me support my son

Can it be so difficult?:beer:

£5 per week says she jst wants to see me suffer, she doesn't want my grandparents's money she wants mine, if the maintenance is for the child then it wouldn't matter where the money comes from now does it?:A

Loopy_Girl

I really couldn't give a toss about your story frankly...but errr thanks

Hopefully it has some cathartic properties for you:beer:

Found_true_love

Loopy_Girl wrote: »

I really couldn't give a toss about your story frankly...but errr thanks

Hopefully it has some cathartic properties for you:beer:

And I dont give a stuff about you although I do love u and your ways, you are very funny.

My story is intended to "preach" to those less enlightened then you and teach them about your wimmin type of ways, its funny how you cant win this argument so you take a shot and when the riposte comes it gets you.

If you didnt give a stuff about my story then why oh why did you invite me to make a comment?:T