• Welcome, guest!

    This is a forum devoted to discussion of Wolverhampton Wanderers.
    Why not sign up and contribute? Registered members get a fully ad-free experience!

Keir Starmer at it again..

Forgive my ignorance, if they haven't paid VAT before what would they be reclaiming? When they pay suppliers do they have to pay VAT even if they are VAT exempt?
I presumed they hadn't paid VAT either. They wouldn't normally.

Think this may be click bait.
 
Forgive my ignorance, if they haven't paid VAT before what would they be reclaiming? When they pay suppliers do they have to pay VAT even if they are VAT exempt?
You do pay VAT, just like you would when you pay for lots of things, it is just that you can't claim it back.
 
Forgive my ignorance, if they haven't paid VAT before what would they be reclaiming? When they pay suppliers do they have to pay VAT even if they are VAT exempt?
Your aren't VAT exempt on what you pay, you are exempt on what you charge
 
I don't pay VAT on some food and children's clothes i think? I don't claim it back either.

Edit. I guess the difference is that no one pays VAT on those things, whereas businesses normally pay VAT on project things
 
You do pay VAT, just like you would when you pay for lots of things, it is just that you can't claim it back.
i don't understand though. Why haven't they been claiming vat before if they are VAT exempt? Why can they only claim the VAT back now?
 
i don't understand though. Why haven't they been claiming vat before if they are VAT exempt? Why can they only claim the VAT back now?
If you aren't registered for VAT, then you can't claim it back. Now they have to become VAT registered, as they are forced to charge VAT on the previously exempt school fees, then they can claim elements of the previous spending back.
 
If you aren't registered for VAT, then you can't claim it back. Now they have to become VAT registered, as they are forced to charge VAT on the previously exempt school fees, then they can claim elements of the previous spending back.
So being VAT exempt means you still have to pay VAT? That seems less than intuitive!

Edit. Every day is a school day, I've just learned what others already know. VAT exempt business still pay VAT on stuff they buy
 
Last edited:
On about cutting red tape now. The old ones are the best. Removing ‘Red tape’ equals:

Your pay and conditions worsen
Building and planning regulations loosened
Less oversight of procurement.

And then disasters and following enquiries saying we shouldn’t have removed that red tape.

Rinse and repeat
 
So being VAT exempt means you still have to pay VAT? That seems less than intuitive!
Applies to everything. As a sole trader I don't earn enough to pay VAT on my earnings so I'm not registered. But if I buy a new laptop for work, it's liable for VAT as it would be for anyone, and I can't have it back.
 
Applies to everything. As a sole trader I don't earn enough to pay VAT on my earnings so I'm not registered. But if I buy a new laptop for work, it's liable for VAT as it would be for anyone, and I can't have it back.
You don't have to not earn enough to be VAT registered. You can voluntarily register for VAT.
 
Applies to everything. As a sole trader I don't earn enough to pay VAT on my earnings so I'm not registered. But if I buy a new laptop for work, it's liable for VAT as it would be for anyone, and I can't have it back.
Doesn't apply to charities, they can claim the VAT back on lots of things including capital projects.

I can't imagine Eton don't do this now. Hence the article is clickbait.
 
You don't have to not earn enough to be VAT registered. You can voluntarily register for VAT.
This. £80,000 before you have to be VAT registered. We are registered as it makes things very much simpler to have a Seller Account on Amazon (🤮🙄😫), even though, sadly we are not close to earning that amount yet. It pays for us to be registered though, once we start getting orders from retailers. You can also register and pay a lower flat rate if you haven't reached the £80,000 threshold, which is what we do for now.
 
Or Starmer could have let her stand.
Her advocacy of Labour seemed to only last as long as she was the candidate, and then having failed to gain selection she willingly stood against the party, knowing that this would likely lead to the Tories retaining the seat.

Her only loyalty is to herself. Shes a self indulgent narcissist ruled by her own ego.
 
Her advocacy of Labour seemed to only last as long as she was the candidate, and then having failed to gain selection she willingly stood against the party, knowing that this would likely lead to the Tories retaining the seat.

Her only loyalty is to herself. Shes a self indulgent narcissist ruled by her own ego.
That's certainly a way of looking at it.
 
Back
Top