<snip>
I didn't realise that there was so much money flowing through the Trust. In around €50m in 2022 alone.
Threadbans
Boggles
AndrewJRenko
Your words: "Phased repayment in this instance is used by Revenue to collect 10s of 1000s of businesses warehouse debt."
My response: "You don't get published as a defaulter when you enter a phased payment arrangement"
Your response: "Publication in the List of Tax Defaulters is a consequence of reaching a settlement with Revenue meeting such defined criteria, and is not negotiable. Likewise, legislation obliges Revenue to publish Penalty Determinations by the courts, where defined criteria are met."
Clearly you inferred that entering a phased payment arrangement with Revenue puts you on the tax defaulters list.
Anyway I'm finished engaging with you now, you are either a troll or a moron, unsure which.
I never suggested there was 10s of 1000s of tax defaulters or that the Trust defaulted.
The was a conspiracy theory cooked up by you and primarily another user.
Do you need quotes?
Out they go to where, exactly?
I live in the inner city. I dont want addicts sleeping in my street any more than you want them housed in your estate or apartment block.
Whether the work is done by public servants working for the local council or private sector workers employed by a charity, addicts etc still need to be provided for somehow.
And I wonder who has more financial irregularities, PVT or (wherever)CC.
If phased payment arrangements get published in the tax defaulters list, could you explain why there aren't 10s of 1000s of businesses listed as defaulters please?
But there is no suggestion of any default from Revenue or any other sort of impropriety or anyone for that matter except for you and another person on here who seem to have reached their conclusions not because of reality but because of some dislike of the Trust?
Would that be fair and accurate?
Yep, I am sure you don't.
"Settlements are published when the extensive voluntary disclosure options are not availed of and the default arises because of careless or deliberate behaviour:"
If you are in the Phased Payment Arrangements, then you have availed of one of the extensive voluntary disclosure options and you are not liable to be published.
Still waiting for that link to explain how PMVT correctly availed of the warehousing arrangements. Will I be waiting much longer?
😂
Sure I don't.
A settlement is not a phased payment arrangement.
You don't know what you're talking about.
Hopefully the investigation by the regulator will clarify how things stand...
I wonder how many of the other 850 or so housing charities used these tax arrangements.
Publication in the List of Tax Defaulters is a consequence of reaching a settlement with Revenue meeting such defined criteria, and is not negotiable. Likewise, legislation obliges Revenue to publish Penalty Determinations by the courts, where defined criteria are met.
Nope.
They claimed the liability relief for the duration of the scheme or until all Covid measures were removed and like 10s of 1000s of other businesses they have now entered into the phased repayment part which was a defined process when they entered the scheme.
You don't get published as a defaulter when you enter a phased payment arrangement
Well that would make them defaulters a list of which is Published.
I think Revenue has realised that PMVT should not have been on any debt warehousing scheme, based on the publicly available financial accounts, and have called in the tax debt which has now forced PMVT to enter into a Phased Payment Arrangement.
Do you think maybe Revenue may know more than him though, has that crossed your mind?
It's like a trader collecting VAT on behalf of revenue, but then spending this and not being able to pay the VAT when due.
“Peter McVerry Trust entered into a phased payment arrangement with Revenue commencing September 2022 and [has] met all payments as part of this arrangement to date,”
He's using the Revenue guidelines and the published accounts. Not much more he can do to satisfy you.
I'm not commenting on the issue of housing policy per se.
I'm commenting on the modus operandi of such charities.
I can see why this trust would have taken advantage of tax deferment to use the money in other ways. As it places them in a stronger position
But it was dishonest. It's like a trader collecting VAT on behalf of revenue, but then spending this and not being able to pay the VAT when due. Such taxes as income and VAT are not belonging to the businesses or charities, they should be put aside and paid when due.
Dishonest.
On the contrary, on the evidence available PMVT did not qualify for the published criteria. As I said, two options.
You are the one claiming fraud, it's up to you prove it not me.
IF they didn't qualify subsequently they would have been removed. From Revenue.
Where the 2020 and 2021 Income Tax return shows the taxpayer did not meet the requirement of a 25% reduction in income compared to 2019, the debt will be removed from warehousing, the due dates will revert to legislative due dates for Income Tax and full statutory interest will apply.
Phased repayment in this instance is used by Revenue to collect 10s of 1000s of businesses warehouse debt.
You have absolutely no evidence to suggest this Trust did not qualify for it, apart from some lad on the internet who isn't qualified suggesting it is.
A phased payment arrangement, which is what they have entered into, is used by Revenue to collect tax debt. So it could be possible that Revenue realised PMVT incorrectly entered into warehousing, called the debt, and now the only option available to PMVT is to use a phased payment arrangement to repay what they owe.
State Policy? There is a clue there.
The only question needs to be asked and answered is are they more efficient at providing the services they provide than the councils and ministries who should be providing them.
If you believe that they were perfectly entitled to warehouse their liability, put up the link to the Revenue criteria that allowed it. Nobody else on here can find it.
If I was donating money to PMVT, I would be pretty annoyed at 8% interest going to Revenue out of my donation. You can see why I stopped donating to the poverty industry over a decade ago.
Or option C, you are not a Revenue Accessor, this is not a "normal business" and they were perfectly entitled to warehouse their liability.
Yes and in this case they are leveraging that state policy to build their empire and make themselves increasingly indispensable.
Many charities do this, started small often by passionate volunteers dedicated to providing a certain service not covered by the state. Then hire a full time administrator and fundraiser/ lobbyist and before you know it, the volunteers are gone, and they have a large payroll with multiple obligations.
€100 on option B
So just to confirm:
They entered a huge PAYE liability into a debt warehousing scheme when they didn't meet the criteria.
They are now paying 8% interest on the repayments to Revenue. What a waste of money.
But it's government money, given to the organisation, to be given back to government via Revenue, so they don't care.
Very easy to spend public money. If this was a private organisation they'd be bankrupt. Once again the taxpayer will have to step in and fill the void.
Well then, it appears that there are two possible explanations as PMVT don't meet the published criteria:
In order to qualify for the Debt Warehousing Scheme, the business must have been unable to pay their tax liabilities due to COVID-19 restrictions, along with the following:
The business turnover was significantly reduced
Or
The volume of customer orders was significantly reduced
Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) managed by the Personal or Business Division in revenue, will automatically enter the debt warehousing scheme. An SME in this context is a business where annual turnover is less than €3 million.
Other businesses (turnover above €3 million) which are managed by Large Corporates Division and Medium Enterprises
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w0.vanillicon.com/v2/04cbf1b64e8b0e561c543c5b1091ba30.svg)
