Mystery Shopping Thread 20 **PLEASE DO NOT MENTION CLIENT NAMES OR FEES ON HERE**

Boredupnorth

Lil_Me wrote: »

Yes is it, but it's almost completely irrelevant.



There is a difference between entertaining clients through choice and claiming tax relief, and having to buy a meal in order to receive the fee.

In our case in order for our businesses to survive most jobs require some aspect of purchase and reimbursement (and let's not pretend this is fun, it's a business and I certainly run it like one). Now the purchase is wholly and exclusively necessary for me to get the fee which I will gladly pay tax on.

As it says -



I don't do jobs for free stuff, I do jobs to get money. Lets face it, how many of us would really eat that much fast food if we weren't getting paid for it?

The point I was trying to make is that the purchase would be considered “wholly and exclusively” if there was a fee attached; where as it would not if it was purely done for the reimbursement.
I therefore think it is relevant and supports what you are saying. My earlier statement that I found it hard to see how you could justify it is wrong and in a situation that a fee plus reimbursement is made you should account for it as you describe.

dazza.mk

Boredupnorth wrote: »

The point I was trying to make is that the purchase would be considered “wholly and exclusively” if there was a fee attached; where as it would not if it was purely done for the reimbursement.

With a caveat with some RE jobs, I can think of some jobs (Pizzas) where in some cases if you pay the menu price then Pizza cost > Fee + Reimbursement. More precisely would be if you make a profit on the job there shouldn't be an issue.

Anything beyond this you 'may' need to argue (as obviously some jobs may justifiably generate a loss).

Lil_Me_2

Boredupnorth wrote: »

The point I was trying to make is that the purchase would be considered “wholly and exclusively” if there was a fee attached; where as it would not if it was purely done for the reimbursement.
I therefore think it is relevant and supports what you are saying. My earlier statement that I found it hard to see how you could justify it is wrong and in a situation that a fee plus reimbursement is made you should account for it as you describe.

Sorry m'dear, I thought you were trying to support your earlier statement x

superliss

Lil_Me wrote: »

If it's a "perk" then it's not an incidental benefit therefore you should pay tax on the reimbursement.

Now repeat after me - "I only do jobs because I get paid for them, I do NOT do it for free stuff or for the perks."

Right then... hard nosed businessman. I hated the theme park. I only did it for the money.

I am so new to this... clearly.

mimi1234

clippy_girl wrote: »

hey hun did you get a reply from anyone? i am also waiting from july 29th i seem to have been paid in the past anywhrere between 22nd-27th so fingers crossed for tomorrow

Hi petal. I got paid by BARE for my jewellery shop from the end of JULY today. Paid by BACS to my HSBC account, but the shop log is still showing as PENDING PAYMENT.

Also, Monica emailed everyone about a COFFEE PHONE call. It's a dead easy phone call and you get reimbursed for the purchase. So why not give it a whirl if you have spare time?

Boredupnorth

Lil_Me wrote: »

Sorry m'dear, I thought you were trying to support your earlier statement x

Nope, If I am wrong I hold my hands up.

I had never really looked in to the thinking of the reimbursement being anything other that a benefit in kind and whilst I could see the argument I thought it was a little tenuous. However having now read a few articals i would be happy debating it with HMRC and would be confident of winning.:jNow going back over my accounts and re writing a few formulas to reduce this years profits:rotfl:

MSRyan

Wow, All this talk of tax, who's got a gun I can borrow?

Boredupnorth

MSRyan wrote: »

Wow, All this talk of tax, who's got a gun I can borrow?

And its not even April!

Boredupnorth

mimi1234 wrote: »

Hi petal. I got paid by BARE for my jewellery shop from the end of JULY today. Paid by BACS to my HSBC account, but the shop log is still showing as PENDING PAYMENT.

Also, Monica emailed everyone about a COFFEE PHONE call. It's a dead easy phone call and you get reimbursed for the purchase. So why not give it a whirl if you have spare time?

BARE always shows like this until a few days after you get the money. Its good to know that its on its way although my bank usually take 2 days longer than others to clear BARE payments. Lets just hope I get everything they owe me too.

Boredupnorth

HappyMJ wrote: »

Most of my mystery shopping jobs create a loss on paper. The HMRC really don't mind. Even my normal day job (computer engineer) creates losses some of the time.

I mainly do mystery shopping to get my hours up to over 30 per week to claim tax credits. The council is probably the most pickiest with regards to expenses (seeing as they are the only ones who actually scrutinize every figure on the accounts) and they allow the meal as an expense against the reimbursement so that I do not lose housing benefit.

I do jobs for the free stuff and the perks.

When you say they dont mind does this mean you have been audited whilst accounting this way or that they have not challeged it?