Freelance IT consulting and tax - a question or two

Both

The rainforest is a red herring.

Pretty much sums up the Quality of this argument :)

"Peter Saxton" wrote

Peter, how can you say the above when the word "abbreviated" does not appear

Whenever you encounter just the two words "statutory accounts", *you* seem to read them to always mean "*full* statutory accounts", even in the case of a small company which is allowed to abbreviate their statutory accounts.

Where is your reference to say that the *abbreviated* accounts are not the ones being called "statutory"?

I think Tim appreciated it!

"4. Circulation

- published;

- laid before the shareholders; and

- filed at Companies House.

It should be noted that, for companies preparing Companies Act accounts, there is a difference between its statutory accounts and the accounts which it must prepare to comply with wider accounting standards. Its statutory accounts consist solely of the profit and loss account and balance sheet, together with notes to those financial statements. Wider accounting standards also require a company to prepare a cash flow statement and a statement of total recognised gains and losses."

Can you see "statutory accounts" above?

What do "abbreviated accounts" mean to you?

"Peter Saxton" wrote

Yes - how does that help?

"Peter Saxton" wrote

They mean that the statutory accounts for a small company are not as comprehensive as for "large" companies... [Hence, the small company's "statutory accounts" are abbreviated.]

Now, do you have a reference to show otherwise?

"Peter Saxton" wrote

They are the statutory accounts of a small/medium company, if it chooses to "abbreviate" them (as it is allowed to do by statute). Aren't they?

So are you saying any accounts prepared following the statutory disclosures are "statutory" - abbreviated or non-abbreviated - in your eyes

The legislation says what is "statutory" and what is "abbreviated"

I think you've misunderstood the statutory definition of statutory!

"Peter Saxton" wrote

Seems like a plan!

"Peter Saxton" wrote

"Peter Saxton" wrote

Hmmmm - where is "statutory" defined in the Statutes?

1. Circulation

4261A company's statutory annual accounts, together with the directors' report must be approved by the board. Those documents, together with the auditor's report (if applicable), must then be:

- published;

- laid before the shareholders; and

- filed at Companies House.

It should be noted that, for companies preparing Companies Act accounts, there is a difference between its statutory accounts and the accounts which it must prepare to comply with wider accounting standards. Its statutory accounts consist solely of the profit and loss account and balance sheet, together with notes to those financial statements. Wider accounting standards also require a company to prepare a cash flow statement and a statement of total recognised gains and losses.

This is taken from FL Memo's Company Law book.

What does "publishing" involve beyond what laying and filing does?

What statutes require compliance with these "wider standards"?

Delivered to individual shareholders. The "laying" means at an AGM.

It doesn't. That is the whole point. That's why it says there's a difference.

"Peter Saxton" wrote

We *know* that "laying" is not always required, per paragraph

So the fact that paragraph 4261A says that anything "must" be done, might be overturned elsewhere...

Where it says "accounts which ... comply with wider accounting standards", it doesn't mean abbreviated statutory accounts, does it?

So you agree that "wider standards accounts" do *not* include the abbreviated statutory accounts (which *are* detailed in statutes)!

You're really clutching at straws now!

Seeing as the Companies Bill lays out various alternatives to submitting the accounts to shareholders it doesn't seem likely.

Can you show any reference that supports not giving the shareholders a copy of the accounts?

I've given various references and you've just made things up as you go along.

You don't seem to be understanding what is written. These "wider accounting standards" require extra information not less. You can't have an accounting standard overruling statute.

"Peter Saxton" wrote

Eh? That bit doesn't answer my questions!

"Peter Saxton" wrote

Exactly! The quote you gave says absolutely

It doesn't say that, whenever it just says "statutory accounts", it means "full" statutory accounts. It certainly doesn't say that abbreviated accounts are not the "statutory" ones. It doesn't say that "full" statutory accounts have to be prepared as well, if a small company decides to abbreviate its statutory accounts.

So why quote that part in answer to my questions?

"Peter Saxton" wrote

No, I'm just anticipating you saying: "paragraph

"Peter Saxton" wrote

It also uses the word "entitled". If you are "entitled" to something, you have a right to have it, but you can just as easily waive that right.

"Peter Saxton" wrote

See above. An *entitlement* is not mandatory!

"Peter Saxton" wrote

You haven't given a single reference which refutes either of the following:-

(1) Whenever "statutory accounts" are mentioned, this can mean the *abbreviated* accounts of a small/medium company (if they choose to abbreviate them);

(2) If "abbreviated statutory accounts" are prepared, then "full statutory accounts" do not need to be prepared.

Can you now find any references that contradict either of these?

I've given them earlier.