Tax inspectors on Narrowboats??

[cereal tiller]

Speedboat is the wrong term, it's the three decker TSDYs based on the Hamble that can use as much fuel zooming across to the Isle of Wight and back as I do in a year's cruising.

Don't forget that some of them actually go Round it!

 

Equivalent to several years usage on a Narrowboat

 

CT

[Machpoint005]

It doesn't matter how much or how little fuel they are using, it's the proportion of 'propulsion' to 'non-propulsion' (generation and heating) that matters.

[LoneWolf]

 

Half my tank was white, half the red I'm buying. I intend to use the white for propulsion, the red for domestic. OK, I know it'll mix, but the half tank I've just bought is all intended for domestic consumption.

 

I understand your reasoning and it would be a defense (in my opinion) in the very unlikely scenario that HMRC ever questioned the 0% propulsion sale but, as i said earlier, the 'correct' thing to do would be claim the domestic percentage for the white from HMRC and make a correct declaration for the intended future use of the red

 

It's all a bit academic though as not only is it an estimate of intended future use which may well not be accurate but any calculation is going to be an estimate anyway and I dont believe HMRC are bothered about chasing us narrowboaters cos it's just not worth it

[furnessvale]

 

How many speedboats do you know with diesel engines? The petrol ones are all paying the duty and fuel tax in full!

Come back Ruggerini F15, all is forgiven!

 

George ex nb Alton retired

[Machpoint005]

Come back Ruggerini F15, all is forgiven!

 

George ex nb Alton retired

 

Tee hee.

[LoneWolf]

 

How many speedboats do you know with diesel engines? The petrol ones are all paying the duty and fuel tax in full!

 

ha ha - yes speedboat was the wrong term but i think people know what i mean

 

[David Schweizer]

A couple of things strange about this anecdote.

 

Firstly, any motor vehicle regularly running on and off road must use white diesel at all times, even off road.

 

Secondly, unless the farmer changed his tank, engine and all pipework, the inspectors would have found sufficient trace of red.

 

Thirdly, if the farmer wishes to upset HMRC by refusing access (not sure if he can by the way) best of luck to him. I reckon he will come off worst when they turn the thumb screws on!

 

George ex nb Alton retired

 

I told the story as accurately as I remember it being told to me, it happened somewhere around 1986 and on a farm in western Pembrokeshire. The rules may have been different then, but I rather suspect that even if the Inspector had summoned Police assistance it would have been of very low priority to them. The number of Police Officers in the whole area could probably have been counted on one hand, and the farmer was a member of a large and well respected local family who had lived in the area for centuries. This was in West Wales George. not five miles from Manchester.

[furnessvale]

 

I told the story as accurately as I remember it being told to me, it happened somewhere around 1986 and on a farm in western Pembrokeshire. The rules may have been different then, but I rather suspect that even if the Inspector had summoned Police assistance it would have been of very low priority to them. The number of Police Officers in the whole area could probably have been counted on one hand, and the farmer was a member of a large and well respected local family who had lived in the area for centuries. This was in West Wales George. not five miles from Manchester.

David, I was in no way doubting your veracity in this matter, but perhaps the farmer was gilding the lily.

 

As an HMRC inspector, I would not have let matters drop as word of this sort of thing would quickly spread and his life would become intolerable.

 

Incidentally, I have not always lived (15) miles from Manchester, but I was once a bobby in metropolitan Cumbria!

 

George ex nb Alton retired

 

ps Just re-reading your post. I should imagine the rules were indeed very different in 1986.

Edited October 21, 2016 by furnessvale

[Stewart Kirby]

There are more than 37 million vehicles on the roads in the UK. About 30 million are cars. The number of vehicles that use deisel fuel far outnumber the claimed 32,000 boats on the inland waterways by millions. There is no chance that HMRC are interested in policing the declarations of boaters. They might have a look at a few suppliers, particularly if someone has complained about the supplier or if there is a sudden change in the returns they make. They just dont have enough people to do the basics of tax, VAT and excise duties as it is without tying up resources on recovering what to them is pin money. Twenty years ago the systems were paper based but now its all computerised and hardly any of the staff can actually do any calculations themselves because they rely on the computer systems to do it all. They dont even check what the computer produces, they just send it out and wait for the "customer" to complain if the computer system has got it wrong. The same is true of other goverment departments systems and of course none of them can interface with each other. In fact systems within the same department rarely exchange data despite departments spending millions trying to integrate them. Sorry, drifted off topic there.

[Paul C]

Maybe they were checking out a supplier who refused to accept a customer's own declaration and forced them to buy it at eg 60/40?

[carlt]

I always find these threads amusing because it seems that it's okay to say "Oh it's alright to flout the red diesel laws because nobody is going to bother enforcing it." Whereas if someone said "There's no need to get a boat licence, CRT can't keep up with enforcement." would soon be followed by total outrage and more than a little rage.

[LoneWolf]

I always find these threads amusing because it seems that it's okay to say "Oh it's alright to flout the red diesel laws because nobody is going to bother enforcing it." Whereas if someone said "There's no need to get a boat licence, CRT can't keep up with enforcement." would soon be followed by total outrage and more than a little rage.

 

I hope you didnt think my posts were suggesting it was ok to under-declare

[carlt]

 

I hope you didnt think my posts were suggesting it was ok to under-declare

Not at all, in fact your explanation on claiming back overpayment rather than making up for it at the next purchase suggested the exact opposite.

[LoneWolf]

Not at all, in fact your explanation on claiming back overpayment rather than making up for it at the next purchase suggested the exact opposite.

 

oh good

 

and oh darn - i thought we may be about to have a robust but reasonable discussion - just to show we could

[frahkn]

Exactly this. ^^^

 

The cost benefit doesn't come into it. They're enforcing the law. Many cases end up in court where the legal costs far outweigh any potential fine.

 

The cost/benefit absolutely does come into it where speculative "fishing exercises" such as the one described are concerned. The potential loss of duty is small because the number of boaters is small in the overall scheme of things.

 

Some cases end up before an appeal tribunal because there is a challenge on a point of law which HMRC can not let go. Only a very small proportion of these ever get to a court.

[Victor Vectis]

Speedboat is the wrong term, it's the three decker TSDYs based on the Hamble that can use as much fuel zooming across to the Isle of Wight and back as I do in a year's cruising.

TSDY? Wassat?

 

Yeahbut the journey over to the Island is worth it, innit!

[cereal tiller]

TSDY? Wassat?

 

Yeahbut the journey over to the Island is worth it, innit!

Twin Screw Diesel Yacht

 

CT

[Neil Smith]

A couple of things strange about this anecdote.

 

Firstly, any motor vehicle regularly running on and off road must use white diesel at all times, even off road.

 

Secondly, unless the farmer changed his tank, engine and all pipework, the inspectors would have found sufficient trace of red.

 

Thirdly, if the farmer wishes to upset HMRC by refusing access (not sure if he can by the way) best of luck to him. I reckon he will come off worst when they turn the thumb screws on!

 

George ex nb Alton retired

there was never any mention of the farmer using red so why would he need to change tank, engine and pipes if he only used white, so not strange at all.

 

Neil

[Victor Vectis]

Thank you.

 

[BruceinSanity]

Not at all, in fact your explanation on claiming back overpayment rather than making up for it at the next purchase suggested the exact opposite.

The one time I got caught paying 60/40 when I didn't want to, I emailed HMRC and asked how I could claim a refund. I was told firmly that there was no mechanism for doing that and I shouldn't have used that supplier if I couldn't sign his standard declaration.

[LoneWolf]

The one time I got caught paying 60/40 when I didn't want to, I emailed HMRC and asked how I could claim a refund. I was told firmly that there was no mechanism for doing that and I shouldn't have used that supplier if I couldn't sign his standard declaration.

 

ooh that's interesting, i've heard of 2 boaters getting a rebate (for red inadvertently purchased at 60/40) They had to fill in a paper form

Was this recently or when the scheme was newish?

 

I'd expect that answer for someone trying to claim for white they put in a boat though

[Horace42]

Back in the 1980s when I first worked freelance through a limited company (in IT) there would be regular inspection visits every few years from both the Inland Revenue (for PAYE) and the Customs & Excise (for VAT). The difference of approach between the two was striking. The Inland Revenue inspectors seemed to have little idea of the nature of my little business, and would ask a few rather irrelevant questions then go away happy. The VAT inspectors were very on the ball, checked the documents to satisfy themselves that the correct VAT was being collected and paid, and also went away happy. Other IT freelancers I knew reported the same experience, and agreed you didn't mess with the VAT man.

 

The inspections petered out in the early 1990s, either because they'd decided I was clean or because the way they chose who to inspect had changed; probably the latter, as I heard a rumour they were using some computer algorithm comparing reported totals against averages for the same type of business to pick promising targets for investigation.

 

The two bodies were merged to form HMRC in 2005.

My brother-in-law was a private butcher and lived over the shop. The tax man was always nit picking how much of his business expenses went on domestic things - especially as most of the income wash untraceable over-counter cash - so he settled for 'industry standard' percentages - that slowly got whittled away by the taxman - meanwhile mopping up back taxes from other businesses claiming more than the norm - much like what you said was your experience.

In my own business, every penny was traceable through cheques and invoices and bank statements and VAT returns where for us we had three 'random' visits from the Vatman over the years and it resulted in a decent sized refund of overpaid duty - so it is not all bad news.

[tillergirl]

If HMRC are checking up on diesel suppliers its because they think they are fiddling the books. The white paper clearly states that the onus is on the purchaser to declare. See my post number 32 in the Diesel Rip off thread for a quote from the White Paper. You are all welcome to copy the schedule if you think it will be useful to you.

Edited October 21, 2016 by tillergirl

[tillergirl]

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/excise-notice-554-fuel-used-in-private-pleasure-craft-and-for-private-pleasure-flying/excise-notice-554-fuel-used-in-private-pleasure-craft-and-for-private-pleasure-flying

 

Here's the paper if you fancy a read

[Stevec]

Mention has been made of it being the purchasers responsibility to declare the split. - I used to work at a boatyard and when the diesel split was introduced people said HMRC would be unlikely to check. We sold quite a lot of diesel and over about 6 years or so, were visited twice by HMRC who checked records and noted several people who had declared 0% propulsion. Several people tried this and argued we had no right to demand a propulsion persentage but HMRC had advised that if we were asked to accept 0% and the tank being filled was obviously for the engine that we would be guilty of aiding an attempt to defraud them.