Overpayment of tax

[Suche] [Administrator] [Hinweise zum Reader] [Startseite]

Finances / Finanzen » uk.finance » Overpayment of tax

Overpayment of tax [message #382831]

Do, 20 April 2006 12:39

nielsonj1976

My wife is a teacher and a member of the NUT. Every month she receives
a magazine from them with other related gumph thrown in. For a couple
of months now there has been a full page letter from a company calling
themselves the "Tax Refund Company" or "Personal Taxation Services".

They claim that around 69% of NUT members who have used their service
have recieved a tax refund - the average being about =A3200, but some
running into the thousands!

You fill in their form and they do all the work for you. If you owe
nothing then you pay them nothing - the rub being that if you do owe
anything they take 40% of the amount owed.

Now I have a few questions about this.

- Firstly, just how poor are the council payroll depts, if over two
thirds of their payroll are being paid incorrectly?

- Secondly, what is the easiest way to check yoursefl whether a refund
is due and how to go about claiming it?

Re: Overpayment of tax [message #382836 ]

Do, 20 April 2006 13:33

Richard Faulkner

In message <1145529547.896633.197440 [at] i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
nielsonj1976 [at] yahoo.co.uk writes
>They claim that around 69% of NUT members who have used their service
>have recieved a tax refund - the average being about £200, but some
>running into the thousands!
>
>You fill in their form and they do all the work for you. If you owe
>nothing then you pay them nothing - the rub being that if you do owe
>anything they take 40% of the amount owed.

Cant believe that the NUT are happy to take advertising money off a
bunch of crooks like this.

--
Richard Faulkner

Re: Overpayment of tax [message #382850 ]

Do, 20 April 2006 15:20

Martin

"Richard Faulkner" <richard [at] estate.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:HFFB5mDjG3REFwSJ [at] estate.demon.co.uk...
> In message <1145529547.896633.197440 [at] i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
> nielsonj1976 [at] yahoo.co.uk writes
>>They claim that around 69% of NUT members who have used their service have
>>recieved a tax refund - the average being about £200, but some running
>>into the thousands!
>>
>>You fill in their form and they do all the work for you. If you owe
>>nothing then you pay them nothing - the rub being that if you do owe
>>anything they take 40% of the amount owed.
>
> Cant believe that the NUT are happy to take advertising money off a bunch
> of crooks like this.
>
> --
> Richard Faulkner

I don't know the firm, but my hunch is that most of the teachers for whom
they secure tax refunds had not been claiming relief for NUT subs.
(Teaching unions are one of the few categories where union subs are usually
tax deductible). If they then reclaim for the last 6 years subs (you can
usually only go back 6 years), then 22% or 40% relief on that lot could
easily be £200.

I very much doubt that councils are incorrectly processing payrolls - they
will merely be applying the tax codes notified to them by HMRC.

Why not check whether your wife is claiming and getting relief for her NUT
subs - and also her annual GTC fee - and if not, get her to write to her
local tax office, quoting the amount she has paid for each of the last 6
years, requesting a tax refund, and asking for her Tax Code for 2006-07
onwards to be amended.

If successful, I'll be happy take 39.9% :-)

HTH

--
Martin

[Remove barrier to reply]

Re: Overpayment of tax [message #382876 ]

Do, 20 April 2006 18:57

Skyes

<nielsonj1976 [at] yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1145529547.896633.197440 [at] i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...

They claim that around 69% of NUT members who have used their service
have recieved a tax refund - the average being about £200, but some
running into the thousands!

Now I have a few questions about this.

- Firstly, just how poor are the council payroll depts, if over two
thirds of their payroll are being paid incorrectly?

I seriously doubt that two thirds of the payroll are being paid incorrectly.
Note that the claim (which, given that it is in an advert, needs to be taken
with a large shovelful of salt in the first place) is that 69% of NUT
members "who have used their service" got a refund. The people who use their
service are probably the ones who suspect there might be something wrong
with their tax in the first place. There are no doubt thousands of other NUT
members who have simple tax affairs, have paid the right amount of tax, and
would never dream of using their service.

Adam

Re: Overpayment of tax [message #382882 ]

Do, 20 April 2006 21:25

Big Dog

On 20 Apr 2006 03:39:07 -0700, nielsonj1976 [at] yahoo.co.uk wrote:

>My wife is a teacher and a member of the NUT. Every month she receives
>a magazine from them with other related gumph thrown in. For a couple
>of months now there has been a full page letter from a company calling
>themselves the "Tax Refund Company" or "Personal Taxation Services".
>
>They claim that around 69% of NUT members who have used their service
>have recieved a tax refund - the average being about £200, but some
>running into the thousands!
>
>You fill in their form and they do all the work for you. If you owe
>nothing then you pay them nothing - the rub being that if you do owe
>anything they take 40% of the amount owed.
>
>Now I have a few questions about this.
>
>- Firstly, just how poor are the council payroll depts, if over two
>thirds of their payroll are being paid incorrectly?
>
>- Secondly, what is the easiest way to check yoursefl whether a refund
>is due and how to go about claiming it?

Check that tax office are deducting subs to union. If teaching a
practical subject that special clothing is being claimed for. If a 40%
tax payer check that pension contributions are being correctly claimed
for.
You don't need a company to charge 40% for doing this, you ca do it
yourself.

Re: Overpayment of tax [message #382884 ]

Do, 20 April 2006 21:40

Ronald Raygun

BeeJay <> wrote:

> Check that tax office are deducting subs to union. If teaching a
> practical subject that special clothing is being claimed for. If a 40%
> tax payer check that pension contributions are being correctly claimed
> for.

A *teacher* a higher-rate taxpayer? Are you some kind of comedian?

Re: Overpayment of tax [message #382898 ]

Fr, 21 April 2006 00:24

tim_back_home2006

Re: Overpayment of tax [message #382905 ]

Fr, 21 April 2006 08:16

occasionallychecked

>>> They claim that around 69% of NUT members who have used their
>>> service have recieved a tax refund - the average being about £200,
>>> but some running into the thousands!
>>>
>>> You fill in their form and they do all the work for you. If you owe
>>> nothing then you pay them nothing - the rub being that if you do owe
>>> anything they take 40% of the amount owed.
>>
>> Cant believe that the NUT are happy to take advertising money off a
>> bunch of crooks like this.
>
> This is the standard method of charging for such checks.
>
> What makes you think that it is crooked

I assume he meant that while the service is legal he considered it immoral.
Rather like the companies that will register you with the TPS/MPS for a
fee, when you could do it easily yourself for free.

> (and I was going to say that I presume they were just
> going to tell people to claim some deductions for
> their professional and magazine subscriptions but I
> see someone has done that already)
>

Re: Overpayment of tax [message #382962 ]

Fr, 21 April 2006 20:26

Big Dog

On Thu, 20 Apr 2006 19:40:07 GMT, Ronald Raygun
<no.spam [at] localhost.localdomain> wrote:

>BeeJay <> wrote:
>
>> Check that tax office are deducting subs to union. If teaching a
>> practical subject that special clothing is being claimed for. If a 40%
>> tax payer check that pension contributions are being correctly claimed
>> for.
>
>A *teacher* a higher-rate taxpayer? Are you some kind of comedian?

No I'm, not a comedian I'm a teacher.

I am a head of dept in a state school and have paid the 40% rate for
the last 4 years. An unpromoted teacher at the top of the pay scale
gets over £30,000, so most promoted members of staff are into the 40%
bracket.

Re: Overpayment of tax [message #382968 ]

Fr, 21 April 2006 20:34

tim_back_home2006

"rob" <occasionallychecked [at] hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:444879e9$1_4 [at] mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com...
>>>> They claim that around 69% of NUT members who have used their
>>>> service have recieved a tax refund - the average being about £200,
>>>> but some running into the thousands!
>>>>
>>>> You fill in their form and they do all the work for you. If you owe
>>>> nothing then you pay them nothing - the rub being that if you do owe
>>>> anything they take 40% of the amount owed.
>>>
>>> Cant believe that the NUT are happy to take advertising money off a
>>> bunch of crooks like this.
>>
>> This is the standard method of charging for such checks.
>>
>> What makes you think that it is crooked
>
> I assume he meant that while the service is legal he considered it
> immoral.

Yes, I'm quite aware of the semantic reason why he
thought it crooked, I was hoping for more explaination.

> Rather like the companies that will register you with the TPS/MPS for a
> fee, when you could do it easily yourself for free.

But unlike registering with TPS, checking a tax return/
coding requires some specialist knowledge that the
potential customer doesn't have.

Anybody who thinks that they can diy this task is free
to do so, they don't have to engage the services of an
agent to do it for them. But if they do engage the agent
he has to be paid for. This task will likely take around
an hour of someone's time plus his travelling costs to you
home (I assume that this is the model) so a reasonable fee
is going to be at least 50 pounds. How may people do
you think would take up this service at that fee level given
that not all customers will see a tax saving. ISTM that
payment by percentage of results is the only way that
this service is financially viable, so what's the problem
here?

tim

Re: Overpayment of tax [message #383008 ]

Sa, 22 April 2006 18:35

Ronald Raygun

BeeJay <> wrote:

> On Thu, 20 Apr 2006 19:40:07 GMT, Ronald Raygun
> <no.spam [at] localhost.localdomain> wrote:
>
>>BeeJay <> wrote:
>>>
>>> If a 40%
>>> tax payer check that pension contributions are being correctly claimed
>>> for.
>>
>>A *teacher* a higher-rate taxpayer? Are you some kind of comedian?
>
> No I'm, not a comedian I'm a teacher.
>
> I am a head of dept in a state school and have paid the 40% rate for
> the last 4 years. An unpromoted teacher at the top of the pay scale
> gets over £30,000, so most promoted members of staff are into the 40%
> bracket.

One possible retort to that is that you've just shot yourself in the
foot, and now everyone will think teachers are overpaid [which they
probably thought already anyway "just look at the holidays they get"
etc].

Another is that you're a non-representative sample and therefore don't
count. Promoted teachers aren't real teachers, they're more like
politicians [well OK, that's a bit harsh, let's say managers then].
Real "face-worker" teachers don't pay higher rate tax.

Re: Overpayment of tax [message #383013 ]

Sa, 22 April 2006 21:36

Big Dog

On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 16:35:26 GMT, Ronald Raygun
<no.spam [at] localhost.localdomain> wrote:

>BeeJay <> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 20 Apr 2006 19:40:07 GMT, Ronald Raygun
>> <no.spam [at] localhost.localdomain> wrote:
>>
>>>BeeJay <> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> If a 40%
>>>> tax payer check that pension contributions are being correctly claimed
>>>> for.
>>>
>>>A *teacher* a higher-rate taxpayer? Are you some kind of comedian?
>>
>> No I'm, not a comedian I'm a teacher.
>>
>> I am a head of dept in a state school and have paid the 40% rate for
>> the last 4 years. An unpromoted teacher at the top of the pay scale
>> gets over £30,000, so most promoted members of staff are into the 40%
>> bracket.
>
>One possible retort to that is that you've just shot yourself in the
>foot, and now everyone will think teachers are overpaid [which they
>probably thought already anyway "just look at the holidays they get"
>etc].
>
>Another is that you're a non-representative sample and therefore don't
>count. Promoted teachers aren't real teachers, they're more like
>politicians [well OK, that's a bit harsh, let's say managers then].
>Real "face-worker" teachers don't pay higher rate tax.

It doesn't make my advice any less relevant, there is the possibility
that the wife of the OP may well have a promoted post.

Re: Overpayment of tax [message #383015 ]

Sa, 22 April 2006 22:04

Ronald Raygun

BeeJay <> wrote:

> It doesn't make my advice any less relevant, there is the possibility
> that the wife of the OP may well have a promoted post.

You mean because if she delegated the task of finding out what's what
to her husband, this is indicative of her managerial skills? :-)

Yes, I accept it's possible, but on the balance of probabilities I
suggest the possibility is remote, not least because in that case
she might be likelier to know about such matters already.

Re: Overpayment of tax [message #383037 ]

So, 23 April 2006 14:19

Fred

"Ronald Raygun" <no.spam [at] localhost.localdomain> wrote in message
news:p%v2g.57702$wl.42241 [at] text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> BeeJay <> wrote:
>
>> It doesn't make my advice any less relevant, there is the possibility
>> that the wife of the OP may well have a promoted post.
>
> You mean because if she delegated the task of finding out what's what
> to her husband, this is indicative of her managerial skills? :-)
>
> Yes, I accept it's possible, but on the balance of probabilities I
> suggest the possibility is remote, not least because in that case
> she might be likelier to know about such matters already.
>

There's an old saying, "when you're in a hole - stop digging"

Teachers are comparative well paid. Outside of London and the south east
there are far more teachers than jobs. Many take on learning support roles
being paid 1/3 of being a teacher.

Their starting pay is reasonable and are immediately on a pay scale with a
respectable maximum. There is then performance related pay before being
promoted into head of year or head of department. I wouldn't call a head of
year a managerial post. If you're any good, keep your nose clean, and want
to get on then a post of head of department is not at all unrealistic. Many
though sit on their backsides and take their pay, it's very difficult to get
rid of teachers, or at least without significant expense.

Re: Overpayment of tax [message #383097 ]

Mo, 24 April 2006 00:34

Jonathan Bryce

nielsonj1976 [at] yahoo.co.uk wrote:

> Now I have a few questions about this.
>
> - Firstly, just how poor are the council payroll depts, if over two
> thirds of their payroll are being paid incorrectly?

It is very unlikely that this is the case.

A lot of these refund agencies are scams. They put in claims for lots of
expenses against your income which aren't allowable, like travel from home
to work.

HMRC have a policy of refund now, ask questions later, so the agency gets
the refund, then later on when HMRC look at the claim and discover that it
is complete rubbish, they come back to you asking for the money back. By
this time, the refund agency will have vanished, and you will be out of
pocket.

Re: Overpayment of tax [message #383098 ]

Mo, 24 April 2006 00:36

Jonathan Bryce

BeeJay <> wrote:

> It doesn't make my advice any less relevant, there is the possibility
> that the wife of the OP may well have a promoted post.

But if you are a 40% taxpayer, it is more likely that the PAYE system will
deduct too little tax than too much. The tax on your payroll earnings will
probably be right, but you will have additional tax to pay on other things
like bank interest.

Re: Overpayment of tax [message #383101 ]

Mo, 24 April 2006 01:18

ACPG

Tthis type of tax advice can come at a high price, and it seems a pity
that people can end up paying so much for advice that's free from
Inland Revenue staff.

Companies like PTS may well adorn their websites with photos of angry
looking staff 'berating the revenue', but the reality is that nobody in
the Inland Revenue wants anyone to pay more than they are due. They
might just simply not know something about yourself that you do.

If any teacher thinks they might be due a refund, they should get in
touch the Revenue themselves first, and see if they can come away about
60% richer!

You'll need to have your National Insurance number and employer's tax
reference number to hand. (Get the employer's tax reference number and
tax office phone number from your payroll department if you don't know
it or you've changed job since your last P60.)

The sorts of things that PTS will ask the revenue to check for are:

+ Professional body subscriptions not being included in your tax code
as they didn't know you were paying them, where these are necessary for
your job and not paid by your employer

+ Them not having complete employment history, resulting in a main job
being taxed at BR as if it was a second job, or a week one 'Emergency'
code being operated at a main job you only had part of the year.

+ You having given up work part way through a year having paid tax

+ You or your partner having claimed your full entitlement to Childrens
Tax Credit for the couple of years immediately preceeding the 'New' Tax
Credits system when it was paid through your tax code

+ You having to pay for the laundering of a uniform with a logo on it,
where your employer doesn't provide facilities and you couldn't wear
the clothes outwith your work

+ You *having* to use your car for your work (not commuting sadly :) ),
but your employer not refunding the mileage at the full Inland Revenue
approved rate

+ You having previously used to have a company car, and your tax code
not being changed when you gave it up.

+ You being on low earnings (less than about =A36500- changes by year)
and paying tax on savings, or on low earnings overall after taking into
account earnings from more than one job and paying tax at BR on a
second job.

There's lots more reasons, so if as PTS suggest there may be something
that you or the Revenue miss, you can always go back and ask The Tax
Refund Company aka Taxbuddies aka Personal Taxation Services to check
later, once you've claimed 100% of any refund you know you can get
yourself!!

The biggest successful claims usually arise from cars incorrectly
coded, being on a BR code at your main job for many years, or not
having CTC in your tax code for the couple of years before the new
system came in when it was claimed that way.

The vast majority of claims are however for for things like
professional subscriptions, and although they aren't worth much it does
add up if you've not been claiming something for 6 years.

Of course you might might find listening to a few minutes of Revenue
muzak too much for you and prefer to use an agency anyway. If you do,
please be careful as there's very many out there, with varying
standards of practice.

Things to beware of:

* Find out who your dealing with; who is the individual dealing with
you? Check that they've got the qualifications they claim before
signing anything authorising them, and check that anything they ask you
to sign looks reasonable. It's no use a company having a picture of
their one qualfied member of staff on the website if the work's
actually done by 100 people that don't have a clue.

+ Check that they have maximum fee. If you've been on the wrong tax
code for six years you could have a claim worth thousands that isn't
any harder to make then one for a few hundred. If they charge a
standard percentage with no maximum you could end up paying an enormous
fee that's really disproportionate to the work involved.

+ Make sure they will automatically return your documents to you
without you having to chase after them

+ Check where the company is based. There are some web-based
organisations that are entirely outwith the UK and even the EEC, apart
from a post box and a redirect non-geographical phone number. If you
sign your refund over to them and then have problems it could be
difficult or impossible to seek recourse.

+ Beware of the too good to be true claims, and people abusing the Self
Assessment procedures. As posted above, the Revenue will often repay
now and ask questions later, so that the vast majority of legitimate
claims are dealt with faster. Don't be caught out by less than
scrupulous people that will obtain a refund by filing a Self Assessment
return showing large spurious expenses, take their cut, and then leave
the IR to chase you for the full amount back after they've head for the
hills!

+ Make sure that the agent will take steps to stop the overpayment
happening again, not just invite you to make another claim with them in
a years time so they get another commission.

+ If it all starts to go wrong, contact your tax office immediately

I'm afraid you'll find that the PTS service slips up on a few of the
above pointers.

Also remember - if you find out you've been paying the wrong amount of
tax, that doesn't necessarily mean it was too much!!!

Vorheriges Thema:	legal(?) IHT dodge
Nächstes Thema:	TAX on savings

Gehe zu:

-=] Zurück zum Anfang [=-

aktuelle Zeit: Di Feb 7 18:06:33 CET 2012

Insgesamt benötigte Zeit, um die Seite zu erzeugen: 0,03201 Sekunden

.:: Startseite - Hinweise - Impressum - Links ::.