Abbreviated Accounts for Companies House

[Richard]

I'm in the process of completing the online submission of the abbreviated accounts to Companies House and I have noticed that the Companies House template has been updated compared to last year in that there is now a choice of Accounting policies:

1. The accounts have been prepared under the historical cost convention and in accordance with the Financial Reporting Standards for Smaller Entities effective June 2002.

2. The accounts have been prepared under the historical cost convention and in accordance with the Financial Reporting Standards for Smaller Entities effective January 2005.

I would be interested to know, what are the significant differences between the two 'standards'?

[Zeno]

That you would actually be interested in knowing? Not a lot...

[David Griffiths]

You just tick the box according to which of the two standards you have complied with.

There isn't a box to tick to say that you haven't complied with any accounting standards. ;)

Here's the 2007 FRSSE (http://www.frc.org.uk/images/uploaded/documents/FRSSE-Jan2007%20web%20optimized1.pdf) so that you can check that you've done things properly. Took 0.57 second on Google, so shouldn't take you too long to find the 2005 version to complete your comparison.

[Richard]

... is to generate some debate about how some of the other questions might be answered.

For instance, amongst the additional questions being asked this year compared to last year is:

'Related Party Disclosures'

Some accountants have suggested to me that the accounts provided to Companies House have little value in determining anything about the health of a company.

Nevertheless, a person preparing answers to the questions asked could use this as an opportunity to communicate something of value.

It might be interesting to consider including something on the balance sheet under intangible assets. :)

[Jenni384]

Some accountants have suggested to me that the accounts provided to Companies House have little value in determining anything about the health of a company.

True

Nevertheless, a person preparing answers to the questions asked could use this as an opportunity to communicate something of value.

It might be interesting to consider including something on the balance sheet under intangible assets. :)

Why would you do that? Why would you want to communicate something of value? The point of being entitled to file abbreviated accounts is to allow the small company some privacy.
If you want to communicate what you actually did, you of course are entitled to file the full accounts at Co House, which have to be prepared anyway to be submitted with the CT600.

But again, why would you? :)

[elainec100@cheapaccounting]

... is to generate some debate about how some of the other questions might be answered.

For instance, amongst the additional questions being asked this year compared to last year is:

'Related Party Disclosures'

Some accountants have suggested to me that the accounts provided to Companies House have little value in determining anything about the health of a company.

Nevertheless, a person preparing answers to the questions asked could use this as an opportunity to communicate something of value.

It might be interesting to consider including something on the balance sheet under intangible assets. :)

can't say I care much - have to do these so just need to get on with it really. :)

[Richard]

Just provide the bare minimum!

I was just curious as to why some new questions had appeared on the Companies House template compared to last year.

[elainec100@cheapaccounting]

new companies act 2006

[Richard]

There isn't a box to tick to say that you haven't complied with any accounting standards. ;)
Have you ever known Companies House to reject Abbreviated Accounts?

They do say that they'll let you know within 5 days whether the documents have been accepted or rejected! :|

[Jenni384]

Have you ever known Companies House to reject Abbreviated Accounts?

They do say that they'll let you know within 5 days whether the documents have been accepted or rejected! :|

They've never rejected any I've submitted.

I guess if you sent in a page saying simply "I made a loss, mate" they might be rejected...! :p

Yes I have heard of DIY accounts being rejected because they don't conform to the accounting standards.

[Tom McClelland]

Be aware that if by dint of heroic efforts you can produce an acceptable set of abbreviated accounts you still need to do a full set of accounts to send in with your CT600. The full accounts are not for amateurs, and even less so the CT600 in my opinion. Since you'll need an accountant to produce those, and they can do abbreviated accounts as a side-effect of the full accounts with almost zero extra work... I guess you can see where I'm going with this...

[Richard]

I guess if you sent in a page saying simply "I made a loss, mate" they might be rejected...! :p
You made me laugh, Jenni..... :D :D

[Jenni384]

Be aware that if by dint of heroic efforts you can produce an acceptable set of abbreviated accounts you still need to do a full set of accounts to send in with your CT600. The full accounts are not for amateurs, and even less so the CT600 in my opinion. Since you'll need an accountant to produce those, and they can do abbreviated accounts as a side-effect of the full accounts with almost zero extra work... I guess you can see where I'm going with this...

Very succinctly put, thanks Tom :D

You made me laugh, Jenni..... :D :D

Good good, Farrant Frost, we aren't just a bunch of number crunchers :D

[elainec100@cheapaccounting]

Have you ever known Companies House to reject Abbreviated Accounts?

They do say that they'll let you know within 5 days whether the documents have been accepted or rejected! :|

yes and then the client comes to an accountant to sort out the mess and you find that the accounts don't balance, they haven't recorded everything, they are not in the right format, there is no CT 600 and no CT in the accounts etc etc etc

:rolleyes::D

[Richard]

yes and then the client comes to an accountant to sort out the mess and you find that the accounts don't balance, they haven't recorded everything, they are not in the right format, there is no CT 600 and no CT in the accounts etc etc etc

:rolleyes::D
Thanks for the levity!! :D :D

I prefer not to use an accountant for basic form filling. I wouldn't expect to sign anything which I couldn't understand! :cool:

The reason for posting this thread was to discover if there was anybody here who had noticed the additional questions asked on the Companies House Abbreviated Accounts template compared to last year.

I answered the questions as best and as briefly as I could and Companies House took just 23 minutes to confirm their satisfaction which is about the same length of time as last year!! ;)

[elainec100@cheapaccounting]

That's great - well done.

Did HMRC also accept your CT600 plus full accounts

In the defence of accountants I would like to say that the abbreviated accounts are abbreviated from the full accounts which together with the CT600 are required by HMRC - a bit more than form filling is involved with these.

Most accountants I know will explain things to a client to ensure that they do not sign anything they do not or do not want to understand.

Good luck though - sounds like you have got this sussed.

[David Griffiths]

I answered the questions as best and as briefly as I could and Companies House took just 23 minutes to confirm their satisfaction which is about the same length of time as last year!! ;)

I take it that you filed on line and Companies House sent you two emails, the second of which confirmed that the submission had been accepted and would be placed on the record. That's some way short of "confirming satisfaction" - it just means that the form has been filled in with no obvious errors. They have no way of knowing if the accounts themselves are correct, or in most cases if the form has been filled in correctly. I don't think that they even cross check the accounts with the annual return to see if the share capital ties up.

Like Elaine, I've seen plenty of accounts rejected by Companies House, and I've also seen quite a few that have been accepted that are glaringly incorrect.

Don't misunderstand me; it's of no consequence to me whether you use an accountant or not. If you can get the figures accepted, excellent. They don't need to be right - and in the great majority of self prepared accounts that I've seen, they aren't.

[Richard]

deleted post

[Richard]

I take it that you filed on line and Companies House sent you two emails, the second of which confirmed that the submission had been accepted and would be placed on the record. That's some way short of "confirming satisfaction" - it just means that the form has been filled in with no obvious errors. They have no way of knowing if the accounts themselves are correct, or in most cases if the form has been filled in correctly. I don't think that they even cross check the accounts with the annual return to see if the share capital ties up.
Maybe David but it does demonstrate that I've complied with the legislation and that the Companies House accounting history for this particular company is complete up to 31 March 2008.

Could it not be argued that the Abbreviated Accounts at Companies House is the first place where a company is required to indicate publicly the extent of their trading activity during the period in question?

[elainec100@cheapaccounting]

It is the only public place for private companies

[Jenni384]

Thanks for the levity!! :D :D

I prefer not to use an accountant for basic form filling.
I wouldn't expect to sign anything which I couldn't understand! :cool:

I completely agree with the last sentence - if you don't understand what you're asked to sign then get the person to explain it to you. It amazes me how many clients sign their tax returns without even a cursory read. I always scan any document I need to sign that's not been prepared by me.

In my opinion, tax forms are not basic! A directors tax return with salary and dividends is reasonably simple and people confident with form-filling should be ok with a SA100 like that, but a CT600 is a different kettle of fish entirely! :cool:

[JGOffshore]

[quote=Richard;757670
Some accountants have suggested to me that the accounts provided to Companies House have little value in determining anything about the health of a company. :)[/quote]

Very true. Who say they have to? I'm the director of a listed PLC with 90+ page report and accounts. Under the international standards I'm not sure these have much value in determining the health of our company either - especially these days.

Accounting standards have contributed a lot to the present financial meltdown.