John Thank you for the information.
My understanding was that the agreement that was hammered out was 60/40 was the "most likely split" for "most average" boaters but those who were continuous cruising and NOT paying council tax on their mooring could claim up to 10/90. If living on a mooring and paying council tax they could claim up to 100% domestic use when not moving. Or to put it another way HMRC would not challenge anyone claiming those proportions. You, the boater, could be asked to justify any other proportions you might claim. How any one could do that or HMRC prove them wrong is an interesting point as no one has to keep any records of fuel usage. But one assumes that they could if necessary. IMHO the agreement is fine. What is need is to help for those boat yards who do not understand or are not implementing the agreement fully to do so. I suspect that part of the problem is a fear that if they get it wrong they could be fined but is there anything any one could suggest that the boating organisations could do to help ease the situation? Paul John Slee wrote: > Paul Strudwick wrote: > >> Please do not be shy about naming your correspondent, or at least the >> organisation they represented. Members of that organisation, on this >> list, can then take it up and try and get the organisations policy >> (stance) changed. >> > I don't think the correspondent was speaking on behalf of the IWA, so > it would be unfair to name him. To be fair he has replied that he was > only trying to put both sides of the case. > I still feel that the waterways organisations should be doing their > best to ensure that the spirit of the HMRC agreement is adhered to. > Who was it that said 60/40 was an acceptable starting point? Any of > the boating organisations? > WBW > John > > > ------------------------------------ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > >
