Second SEISS grant I am eligible or not ?

dave1968

Hi I claimed the first grant as my business was affected from around mid March. Last 2 months things have improved somewhat. My business is all online. But people are spending less than they did. However my business on looking at what I turned over last year in comparison to this year - and specific from July 14th through to now August my takings are around 6 to 8% down from last year. I have been told I qualify for the second grant but have not applied yet. Question is would this marginal downturn in business be enough to satisfy any potential investigation to see if i was affected or not ? I ask because it is really ambiguous as HMRC have stated there is not min threshold for how much you have been affected by.

And then another scenario if I claim the second grant what happens if say in the start of September I suddenly get a burst of business and end the year with same or similar turnover from last year ?

Just wondering what others think of this ?

thanks Dave

macman

What might or might not happen in September is not relevant: you might win a million on the lottery for all HMRC know. The qualifying factor is whether your business was adversely affected as at 14/7/20, From what you have told us, it was, so you should apply.

dave1968

macman said:

What might or might not happen in September is not relevant: you might win a million on the lottery for all HMRC know. The qualifying factor is whether your business was adversely affected as at 14/7/20, From what you have told us, it was, so you should apply.

Hi Macman I get what your saying if taking the literal interpretation of what HMRC are saying on this. And moral arguments aside - HMRC could argue if they were to ask me to prove I was affected that a 5 to 8% swing in turn over is within what the normal ebb and flow of a business would be. This is the ambiguity that seems to be built into this, maybe as a way to deter people who feel unsure like myself or border line. The last thing I want is some massive investigation from HMRC. They can be quite a nightmare to deal with at the best of times ;-) And by what they say you could read it as if you are just £100 down on this time last years trading then you qualify. I would hate to be in a position where Im faced with having to pay everything back plus a potential 100% penalty on top. So confusing... thanks for your reply )

Jeremy535897

I will be very surprised if HMRC hound legitimate traders with businesses that have been adversely affected by coronavirus, even if only modestly, and even if the grant significantly exceeds the cost of coronavirus. Turnover is not the be all and end all. One trader might have opened a second shop in February 2020. Overall turnover now may be up on last year when there was only one shop, but each shop might be performing much worse than it would have if there was no coronavirus. On the other side of the coin, a sole trader who just decided to take 3 months holiday would see a significant drop in turnover, but it would have nothing to do with coronavirus.

dave1968

Jeremy535897 said:

I will be very surprised if HMRC hound legitimate traders with businesses that have been adversely affected by coronavirus, even if only modestly, and even if the grant significantly exceeds the cost of coronavirus. Turnover is not the be all and end all. One trader might have opened a second shop in February 2020. Overall turnover now may be up on last year when there was only one shop, but each shop might be performing much worse than it would have if there was no coronavirus. On the other side of the coin, a sole trader who just decided to take 3 months holiday would see a significant drop in turnover, but it would have nothing to do with coronavirus.

Agree with your points that sounds logical but HMRC do not always follow logic ;-) .... I meet all the criteria such as I have been trading in the past continued to trade and will continue to trade during 2020 and 2021 its just the level of how was I affected income wise which could be seen as marginal. No one seems to be able to work out a definitive answer as to what would be seen as adversely affected or not. Its that definition which is wide open to interpretation from HMRC I feel.

Jeremy535897

Personally I think the guidance is clear. Your business is adversely affected if your turnover has fallen, or you have lost a contract, or you have fewer customers. It is adversely affected if you have more costs, like PPE. The guidance says:

"Adversely affected is typically when your business has experienced lower income or higher costs due to coronavirus.

HMRC expects you to make an honest assessment about whether your business has been adversely affected. There is no minimum threshold over which your business’ income or costs need to have changed.

If you make a claim for the Self-Employment Income Support Scheme grant you’ll have to:

• keep records of how and when your business has been adversely affected
• confirm to HMRC that your business has been adversely affected by coronavirus

Decide if you’ve been adversely affected

Your business could be adversely affected by coronavirus if, for example:

• you’re unable to work because you:
  • are shielding
  • are self-isolating
  • are on sick leave because of coronavirus
  • have caring responsibilities because of coronavirus
• you’ve had to scale down, temporarily stop trading or incurred additional costs because:
  • your supply chain has been interrupted
  • you have fewer or no customers or clients
  • your staff are unable to come in to work
  • one or more of your contracts have been cancelled
  • you had to buy protective equipment so you could trade following social distancing rules

If your business recovers after you’ve claimed, your eligibility will not be affected."