Parliament will debate the petition ‘Scrap plans forcing self-employed & small business to do four tax returns yearly’ (www.bit.ly/1IWRnjm) on 25 January 2016, after it received more than 106,000 signatures.
Parliament will debate the petition ‘Scrap plans forcing self-employed & small business to do four tax returns yearly’ (www.bit.ly/1IWRnjm) on 25 January 2016, after it received more than 106,000 signatures. The government’s response to the petition was reported last week in Tax Journal.
Meanwhile, the Treasury Committee has written a letter to Financial Secretary to the Treasury, David Gauke, expressing its concerns about the government’s plans on making tax digital and ‘quarterly tax returns’. The letter, written on behalf of Treasury Committee chairman Andrew Tyrie, noted that: ‘Many small businesses, and their tax advisers, are deeply concerned about these proposals [which is] scarcely surprising given the lack of detailed explanation, readily available from the government, about how the proposals will be implemented.’
The letter asks Gauke to provide assurance that:
For the letter, see www.bit.ly/1Q2PC5N.
Parliament will debate the petition ‘Scrap plans forcing self-employed & small business to do four tax returns yearly’ (www.bit.ly/1IWRnjm) on 25 January 2016, after it received more than 106,000 signatures.
Parliament will debate the petition ‘Scrap plans forcing self-employed & small business to do four tax returns yearly’ (www.bit.ly/1IWRnjm) on 25 January 2016, after it received more than 106,000 signatures. The government’s response to the petition was reported last week in Tax Journal.
Meanwhile, the Treasury Committee has written a letter to Financial Secretary to the Treasury, David Gauke, expressing its concerns about the government’s plans on making tax digital and ‘quarterly tax returns’. The letter, written on behalf of Treasury Committee chairman Andrew Tyrie, noted that: ‘Many small businesses, and their tax advisers, are deeply concerned about these proposals [which is] scarcely surprising given the lack of detailed explanation, readily available from the government, about how the proposals will be implemented.’
The letter asks Gauke to provide assurance that:
For the letter, see www.bit.ly/1Q2PC5N.