BA Strike - Your Thoughts & Questions III
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: England
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unions are mutual traders, ie, they only have income from their own members, which they spend for those members benefit. There is no profit element involved, hence no tax is due and there is no requirement to submit accounts to the Revenue.
However, this does not mean that no accounts are prepared at all, a statement of income and what it is spent on can/should be prepared and supplied to members.
However, this does not mean that no accounts are prepared at all, a statement of income and what it is spent on can/should be prepared and supplied to members.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: DFW, Tx - USA
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Verryyy Interesing - - -
Looking in on the Cabin Crew forum to read the "BA Crew ONLY" thread and I find it is dead. But the very interestin thing is another thread below the "crew ONLY" thread titled "BA LHR Mixed Fleet". This thread has been LOCKED! Read the entire thread and can see NO REASON for it being locked. No attacks of any kind - no playing the person rather than the ball!! All in all, a very harmless thread full of polite posts.
Is it now the rule of the "flying dragonS" that there can only be ONE thread in the CC forum about BA CC - in ANY form? Are we allowed to post in this thread using the words - "BA" or "CC" or "cabin crew"? Only time will tell. . . .
Mystified in Texas . . .
Is it now the rule of the "flying dragonS" that there can only be ONE thread in the CC forum about BA CC - in ANY form? Are we allowed to post in this thread using the words - "BA" or "CC" or "cabin crew"? Only time will tell. . . .
Mystified in Texas . . .
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AASLF, it isn't dead, it is bedtime in the UK. But I too am mystified why the MF thread was closed with no explanation. From what I read it was quite informative. Maybe there were subsequent removed posts that caused it to be locked.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Wiltshire
Age: 82
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tax
LD & Observer
Thanks for the response - if I have this correctly .....
The only requirement for accounts, is that which an individual union decides it wants, (if any), for internal purposes and maybe to show its membership where their money goes .........
So, any taxes payable are those due as personal tax, from any individuals who are in receipt of money from the union, for any purpose to do with carrying out union duties in some fashion, be it attendance money for reps or full blown salary for union officials, such as Branch Secretary, Chairman, etc..
For example, as CC, this would of course be in addition to their normal employment income, for which BA supply details to HMRC. Presumably therefore, there is a requirement upon the union as an employer, to provide details of payments made to individuals, in which case I would presume there to be normal employment and accounting records and of course those covering overheads - or is there some loophole whereby this can be avoided - do HMRC only look at the individuals declarations ?
In theory, this seems to be a decent sized black hole, which money can be poured into and vanish. I find it hard to believe in this day and age, that there are not any other checks and balances.
Thanks for the response - if I have this correctly .....
The only requirement for accounts, is that which an individual union decides it wants, (if any), for internal purposes and maybe to show its membership where their money goes .........
So, any taxes payable are those due as personal tax, from any individuals who are in receipt of money from the union, for any purpose to do with carrying out union duties in some fashion, be it attendance money for reps or full blown salary for union officials, such as Branch Secretary, Chairman, etc..
For example, as CC, this would of course be in addition to their normal employment income, for which BA supply details to HMRC. Presumably therefore, there is a requirement upon the union as an employer, to provide details of payments made to individuals, in which case I would presume there to be normal employment and accounting records and of course those covering overheads - or is there some loophole whereby this can be avoided - do HMRC only look at the individuals declarations ?
In theory, this seems to be a decent sized black hole, which money can be poured into and vanish. I find it hard to believe in this day and age, that there are not any other checks and balances.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: England
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unite the union would have a PAYE scheme in operation for its salaried staff either full or part time.
I do not know whether attendance money paid to reps who lose money as they are 'off work' is taxed at the time of payment by the union, but it would be taxable on the individual who should declare it to HMRC by self assessment if it is not taxed, or taxed at the wrong rate.
The Union would have to declare any untaxed payments made, and there is a form to be submitted to HMRC to do this, it is sent along with the normal end of tax year payroll documentation.
Some payments made to reps etc might be classed as expenses, and as the union has a PAYE scheme with the Revenue, HMRC may have been involved in determining what they can class as expenses and pay tax free (just as they have with CC and pilot allowances)
I do not know if BASSA have any directly paid employees, they may all be paid by Unite, rather than locally, but if paid by BASSA, they would also have a PAYE scheme, and the same rules would apply.
I do not know whether attendance money paid to reps who lose money as they are 'off work' is taxed at the time of payment by the union, but it would be taxable on the individual who should declare it to HMRC by self assessment if it is not taxed, or taxed at the wrong rate.
The Union would have to declare any untaxed payments made, and there is a form to be submitted to HMRC to do this, it is sent along with the normal end of tax year payroll documentation.
Some payments made to reps etc might be classed as expenses, and as the union has a PAYE scheme with the Revenue, HMRC may have been involved in determining what they can class as expenses and pay tax free (just as they have with CC and pilot allowances)
I do not know if BASSA have any directly paid employees, they may all be paid by Unite, rather than locally, but if paid by BASSA, they would also have a PAYE scheme, and the same rules would apply.
Just to add a bit of clarity to this. BASSA is not a union. It is a branch of a union, Unite, therefore it escapes a lot of bothersome interference by accountants, Certification office, HMRC etc.
The main union UNITE has to provide details of its finances, administration costs, payments to General Secretary etc. each year and publish it to members.
The tax man has shown interest in BASSA in the past and I think an investigation may still be ongoing. The fact that BASSA never tells its members anything about the finances means they tend never to feature on the members list of priorities.
One day a group of brave souls will go to a members meeting and demand to see the books as is their right under rule, but I wont hold my breath!
The main union UNITE has to provide details of its finances, administration costs, payments to General Secretary etc. each year and publish it to members.
The tax man has shown interest in BASSA in the past and I think an investigation may still be ongoing. The fact that BASSA never tells its members anything about the finances means they tend never to feature on the members list of priorities.
One day a group of brave souls will go to a members meeting and demand to see the books as is their right under rule, but I wont hold my breath!
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Cumbria
Posts: 586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Come now Litebulbs. Irregularity or no irregularity we have seen what happens to individuals who question any action on the part of BASSA leadership. It would take someone brave or reckless to openly question any of the BASSA leadership nest.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Diplome
Oh to be the brave and reckless at Bedfont. I would see it as a personal responsibility to open my mouth, if I did not believe or trust my leaders. I am sure I could muster up more than a few friends to protect me from a cabin crew mob.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Cumbria
Posts: 586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would count those at Bedfont as reckless, but hardly brave.
..and I believe you underestimate just how spiteful BASSA leadership can be when dealing with dissent.
This is not a "normal" union we are speaking of...its something quite different.
..and I believe you underestimate just how spiteful BASSA leadership can be when dealing with dissent.
This is not a "normal" union we are speaking of...its something quite different.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was rather of your view Litebulbs, I failed to understand what could be feared from a CC mob, what where they going to do, break into your home and criticise your curtains?
However, the peer pressure and pack mentality in play is actually a lot more real than you might imagine if you haven’t been exposed to it.
However, the peer pressure and pack mentality in play is actually a lot more real than you might imagine if you haven’t been exposed to it.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fair points, but it would not be the individual against the mob, if you believe the figures on 'ere. It is easy not to feel threatened sitting in front of a monitor typing, but I am a rep and like most reps outside of BASSA, I am the one getting it in the neck, from faceless people on a keyboards or standing up at meetings telling employees their jobs are at risk. As I hope you can imagine, that is not all hamburgers, ribbons, xxxx's and yellow pens.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: England
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to add a bit of clarity to this. BASSA is not a union. It is a branch of a union, Unite, therefore it escapes a lot of bothersome interference by accountants, Certification office, HMRC etc.
However, payments of out of pocket expenses could be made without HMRC involvement, if that was all that was paid.
Generally, any organisation/club which collects subscriptions from members, prepares accounts to present to members showing how their money has been spent. These accounts are usually available to members to approve at an AGM. This has nothing to do with HMRC requirements.
Mutual trading organisations can be expected to make Returns to HMRC in certain circumstances, see this link
HM Revenue & Customs: Unincorporated organisations and Corporation Tax
If BASSA make payments of salary to any officials, they would be required to have a PAYE scheme. Whether or not they were a union, or a branch of one, would not matter, only if said salary were paid from their own funds.
However, payments of out of pocket expenses could be made without HMRC involvement, if that was all that was paid.
Generally, any organisation/club which collects subscriptions from members, prepares accounts to present to members showing how their money has been spent. These accounts are usually available to members to approve at an AGM. This has nothing to do with HMRC requirements.
Mutual trading organisations can be expected to make Returns to HMRC in certain circumstances, see this link
HM Revenue & Customs: Unincorporated organisations and Corporation Tax
However, payments of out of pocket expenses could be made without HMRC involvement, if that was all that was paid.
Generally, any organisation/club which collects subscriptions from members, prepares accounts to present to members showing how their money has been spent. These accounts are usually available to members to approve at an AGM. This has nothing to do with HMRC requirements.
Mutual trading organisations can be expected to make Returns to HMRC in certain circumstances, see this link
HM Revenue & Customs: Unincorporated organisations and Corporation Tax
Amicus CC89 reps get £60 per day less tax and NI which can mean taxation at 40% for most. This goes back to the formation of CC89 when a deal was struck with HM Revenue at their request (HMRC). The TGWU has avoided such arrangements for years despite attempts by HMRC to tax these sums that is why I say I believe the investigation is 'ongoing'.
It is absolutely correct that accounts must be kept and should be available for inspection by any member at the monthly branch meeting that is in the Unite rule book and BASSA branch consitution - but it just NEVER happens.
Last edited by vctenderness; 7th Nov 2010 at 14:09. Reason: clarity in one sentence
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: England
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well as treasurer of my club I pay 'out of pocket' expenses - they give me a receipt and I repay them what they have expended (out of their own pocket) on the club's behalf.
That is not the same as a flat rate amount. A flat amount, especially if it is to recompense for reduced income while you are rostered off duty, would be taxable, somewhere, and I can't see why HMRC haven't enforced this with BASSA reps, or any ex T&GW members, if they have already done so with CC89/Amicus. It wouldn't take years. A 'back years' investigation may take time, but not enforcing correct compliance from a given date.
Maybe they have, but you are not privy to any evidence to that effect. And if you are not a member of that union, you should not be privy to that evidence.
All you can do is persuade someone who is to find out. Or what Litebulbs said.
That is not the same as a flat rate amount. A flat amount, especially if it is to recompense for reduced income while you are rostered off duty, would be taxable, somewhere, and I can't see why HMRC haven't enforced this with BASSA reps, or any ex T&GW members, if they have already done so with CC89/Amicus. It wouldn't take years. A 'back years' investigation may take time, but not enforcing correct compliance from a given date.
Maybe they have, but you are not privy to any evidence to that effect. And if you are not a member of that union, you should not be privy to that evidence.
All you can do is persuade someone who is to find out. Or what Litebulbs said.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: 45 yards from a tropical beach
Posts: 1,103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Litebulbs
It seems to me that there are two significant admissions here.
1. You would feel the need for protection if you were to open your mouth.
2. You have absolutely no idea of the state of BASSA's accounts.
Both of which are deplorable, more so for a 'rep.'
Oh to be the brave and reckless at Bedfont. I would see it as a personal responsibility to open my mouth, if I did not believe or trust my leaders. I am sure I could muster up more than a few friends to protect me from a cabin crew mob.
1. You would feel the need for protection if you were to open your mouth.
2. You have absolutely no idea of the state of BASSA's accounts.
Both of which are deplorable, more so for a 'rep.'