FranLab is getting evicted

[Towger]

If you send a paper tax return into the Tax Man here they would post it back to you with a strongly worded letter to do it online. I speak from experience :-;

[basinstreetdesign]

This is enough work and trouble that she'll need an accountant, like many other small business owners do. The whole deal again is not really how complex it is (just pay someone qualified, as Dave does), but how much you'll make a year to cover all your expenses and hopefully get some extra.

Yeah, I don't know why you'd even mention it in a video. Just sell stuff with a decent margin and pay an accountant.
I collect 10% GST on Aussie sales and give that to the government, and pay company tax (25%) on any profits. I pay myself a wage (which is a company expense) and pay tax personally at my tiered pesonal tax rate (they make it so you can't avoid tax either way you do it).
No real state based taxes here to worry about.

I started using a tax return preparer when I went into business with a couple partners some years ago.  That ended 20 years ago and I still use one.  Its about an hours work for me to stuff all of the relevant paperwork (for both my wife and I) into an envelope and send it to her.  For a relatively small fee she takes into account some tax rules I couldn't even guess about, does the data entry, posts it to Revenue Canada and both wife and I get a nice refund by direct deposit which far outweighs her fee.  Easy-Peasy.  Why do it any other way?

[nctnico]

I get a nice refund by direct deposit
  That is excess money you paid earlier on. It is like buying your own Christmas gift. Maybe you should think about somebody else to do your taxes so you are not lending money to the government.

[fourfathom]

I get a nice refund by direct deposit
  That is excess money you paid earlier on. It is like buying your own Christmas gift. Maybe you should think about somebody else to do your taxes so you are not lending money to the government.

We often get a refund because:

• We pay quarterly,
• our income and taxes are unpredictable,
• we always file an extension because the end-of-year statements we need don't arrive until mid-Q1 at best,
• and year-end tax-planning (such as harvesting losses) can have a big impact,
• and the IRS charges fees, interest, and penalties for under-payment.

So we try to predict as best we can and over-pay as we feel appropriate.  Any refund gets applied to our Q1 payment.

But yes, if I still got a regular paycheck or otherwise predictable income I would attempt to avoid overpayment.

[SiliconWizard]

Getting slightly off-topic, but not so much as many find tax stuff much too complex to the point of either refusing to do some types of activities, or having to resort to specialists.
I do think tax systems in most countries are too intricate and cumbersome, and people responsible for collecting taxes should be the ones to help the taxed, not the other way around, and they should even help people optimize their taxes. They should not be seen as willing to screw you up. This would  make everyone's life dramatically better. And it should also all be drastically simplified.

This is just making small business's lives a royal pain while large companies have no problem paying entire departments of people to optimize and even evade taxation to a large extent.

And if you feel like your tax system is already too complex, you haven't seen it all. Over here it's so complex that the whole thing is described in many very large books forming close to an encyclopedia, that is absolutely nuts.

Just my 2 cents.

[PlainName]

and people responsible for collecting taxes should be the ones to help the taxed, not the other way around

Sounds like you think tax is a penalty, whereas it's actually a contribution to the community. But then politicians (and police) are supposed to be working for us whereas an alien passing by would assume the opposite.

One mitigation is that if everyone sorts their own tax then it should tax barely any time. If the tax authority has to do it then it takes <size of population>/<size of tax office> times as long. And the tax payer will be paying those wages.

Otherwise I agree that it can be complicated and it can be difficult to get any assistance from the tax people. Here, that's what we expect from any government department, unfortunately

[mendip_discovery]

Because as soon as you add Lawyers to any problem it just gets messy. The only people who can afford Lawyers are wealthy enough to need them to hide the money. It amasing the amount of legal loopholes that they use that if the average person was to try would end up at the wrong end if the tax man.

Copyright is another thing messed up by the same people.

[EEVblog]

Talking about the possible reversing of gentrification in some cities.
Maybe a city will offer tax/financial incenties for artists and creators to move into live/work spaces? I can see some governments throwing money at that.

[tautech]

Maybe a city will offer tax/financial incenties for artists and creators to move into live/work spaces? I can see some governments throwing money at that.

If they own it they can do what they like however if renting why would your landlord want to expose their premises to 24/7 wear and tear associated with a live/work lease.
Instead commercial 40hrs/week wear and tear risk is more attractive to the landlord unless there are just not those tenants available.

A buddy with several commercial properties flatly refuses to have any live in tenants.

[Nusa]

Depends on the country, of course, but generally it can take months longer to evict a resident tenant than a business-only tenant if they stop paying. Which is money lost for them.

As for wear and tear, that really depends on the business. They could run 3 shifts and use the place 24/7, in some cases.

[EEVblog]

Depends on the country, of course, but generally it can take months longer to evict a resident tenant than a business-only tenant if they stop paying. Which is money lost for them.
As for wear and tear, that really depends on the business. They could run 3 shifts and use the place 24/7, in some cases.

Here there is usually no limit to how many hours you can use a commercial space, so you can usr it 24/7 if you want, but there is allmost always a "no living" clause that prevent sleeping there.
Techically, even though I own my lab, if Mrs EEVblog booted me out of the house then I technically couldn't sleep there according to the strata agreement.

Here there is usually a "make good" clause where you have the return a commercial premesis to the same state you got it in (almost always A grade here), re-paint clauses etc.
I got out of re-painting my rented 100sqm lab because it has just been painted before I moved in, and I put nothing on the walls and cleaned it.

[EEVblog]

Maybe a city will offer tax/financial incenties for artists and creators to move into live/work spaces? I can see some governments throwing money at that.

If they own it they can do what they like however if renting why would your landlord want to expose their premises to 24/7 wear and tear associated with a live/work lease.

Government subsidy money print go brrrrr.

[Halcyon]

Depends on the country, of course, but generally it can take months longer to evict a resident tenant than a business-only tenant if they stop paying. Which is money lost for them.
As for wear and tear, that really depends on the business. They could run 3 shifts and use the place 24/7, in some cases.

Here there is usually no limit to how many hours you can use a commercial space, so you can usr it 24/7 if you want, but there is allmost always a "no living" clause that prevent sleeping there.
Techically, even though I own my lab, if Mrs EEVblog booted me out of the house then I technically couldn't sleep there according to the strata agreement.

I'm guessing that will never be enforced unless someone catches you walking around the public areas in your boxer shorts, on the way to the bathroom, then dobs you in.

[james_s]

Talking about the possible reversing of gentrification in some cities.
Maybe a city will offer tax/financial incenties for artists and creators to move into live/work spaces? I can see some governments throwing money at that.

Wishful thinking. When has reverse gentrification ever happened anywhere? What is in it for the cities to do that? The cities have every incentive to gentrify as much as possible and attract as many high income earners and high value properties as possible because expensive property and high earners bring far more tax revenue.

[EEVblog]

I'm guessing that will never be enforced unless someone catches you walking around the public areas in your boxer shorts, on the way to the bathroom, then dobs you in.

Yeah, I'm almost always the only one in the building after hours. And I shower down the corridor after the gym, so I doubt anyone would know if I actually slept there.
And yes it would be complaint based anyway.
It's just a technical clause to prevent anyone from turning an office into an apartment.

[EEVblog]

Wishful thinking. When has reverse gentrification ever happened anywhere? What is in it for the cities to do that? The cities have every incentive to gentrify as much as possible and attract as many high income earners and high value properties as possible because expensive property and high earners bring far more tax revenue.

Reading the article it actually seems to be a form of gentrification, turning unrented office space into apartments. Difference is they mention artists etc so office space into work/live space.
Essentially just changing zoning/strata laws I guess?

[tom66]

After COVID, there are many more remote workers. Especially in very expensive cities.  This piece from Bloomberg compares the foot traffic at a chain of sandwich shops before and well after the pandemic lockdowns. Visits in NYC are down to 40-50% of its pre-COVID high across the board, whereas surprisingly the British are mostly returning to normal*.  With office blocks and retail units going empty, I'm not surprised landlords want to find something else to fill them. 

There are a few problems though.  Often, the rents on those units are implied by the mortgage;  the bank lends $X to buy a property on the assumption that rent of, say, $X/25 per annum can be charged.  Well, it's much less likely a resident can afford the rent that a commercial unit would carry, unless the rental units are more split up, which tends to lead to rather inefficient use of space.  Residential units also require more upkeep, have stricter regulations (not sure about the US, but things like heating and plumbing systems are usually the landlord's responsibility in the UK, and it can become a life-safety issue if heating fails in winter) and these tend to be let for shorter periods of time.  It's also more likely that a residential tenant will default on their rent and then be very difficult to remove.  Charging less rent to attract tenants is often prohibited by the bank, because it effectively devalues the property. 

I suspect we will see a crash in commercial property values in the longer term, because landlords aren't going to be able to cover mortgages on no rent, and aren't allowed to charge less to tenants that are willing to pay.

*I do find this an interesting anomaly; but I note most companies in the UK are going to a three days in the office hybrid model rather than fully remote. Not sure what's typical in the US, I've heard some Bay Area companies are still fully or mostly (>4 days/week avg) remote.

[PlainName]

... and aren't allowed to charge less to tenants that are willing to pay

Gosh, didn't know that.

[EEVblog]

I suspect we will see a crash in commercial property values in the longer term, because landlords aren't going to be able to cover mortgages on no rent, and aren't allowed to charge less to tenants that are willing to pay.

Sadly not happening in my business park. Commercial property if still at record highs and there is hardly any stock, and what there is still sells quickly.
I'd love to buy a bigger lab but I suspect I'll never be able to.

[tom66]

... and aren't allowed to charge less to tenants that are willing to pay

Gosh, didn't know that.

Apparently, the biggest problem is due to these mortgages being sold off as "parcelised" financial instruments.  Any change to the terms for one mortgage needs to be agreed with upwards of 100 institutions. 

This is one reason you see so many town centres (at least in some areas) full of empty units.  In theory there's no shortfall of willing tenants, but there is a shortfall of tenants able to pay the £/$10k per month that unit demands.

It needs to change, but it'll only change with government intervention (or the market falling apart) and that'll only happen if the government is willing to cause another run on the markets, so pretty unlikely.  A lot of those mortgage instruments are bought by pension funds too, seen as a fairly secure investment up until now.

[SiliconWizard]

I suspect we will see a crash in commercial property values in the longer term, because landlords aren't going to be able to cover mortgages on no rent, and aren't allowed to charge less to tenants that are willing to pay.

Sadly not happening in my business park. Commercial property if still at record highs and there is hardly any stock, and what there is still sells quickly.
I'd love to buy a bigger lab but I suspect I'll never be able to.

Problem of course is that the crash is looking to be happening, but when it hits hard enough, odds are that the economy will be so bad that many small businesses will have a hard time even buying cheap properties.

[james_s]

I do find this an interesting anomaly; but I note most companies in the UK are going to a three days in the office hybrid model rather than fully remote. Not sure what's typical in the US, I've heard some Bay Area companies are still fully or mostly (>4 days/week avg) remote.

Prior to the pandemic my employer had a hybrid schedule with 3 days in the office and  2 days remote. We went fully remote during the pandemic and have struggled to get people back to even 1 day a week consistently in the office. The problem with office space is that for coming into the office to make sense, everyone, or at least whole teams need to pretty much all come in on the same day(s). Whether you all come in one day a week or 5 doesn't impact the amount of office space you need.

[PlainName]

Whether you all come in one day a week or 5 doesn't impact the amount of office space you need.

You could stagger the team days so only one team is in at a time. And/or share with another company, alternating days. Or meet up in a different pub each week.

[Kasper]

Talking about the possible reversing of gentrification in some cities.
Maybe a city will offer tax/financial incenties for artists and creators to move into live/work spaces? I can see some governments throwing money at that.

Wishful thinking. When has reverse gentrification ever happened anywhere? What is in it for the cities to do that? The cities have every incentive to gentrify as much as possible and attract as many high income earners and high value properties as possible because expensive property and high earners bring far more tax revenue.

It's not always up to the cities to make those decisions.

Provincial governments sometimes make slums despite strong opposition from the local taxpayers and their city councils.  They even use numbered companies to hide their identity when purchasing.

When city councils push back, the province threatens to set up tent cities and override zoning decisions.

The locals hate it but many voters want to live in the best areas without paying the market rate.  The provincial government of BC just announced $500M to buy their votes.

to provide one time, capital grants to non-profit housing organizations to purchase affordable rental buildings and co-ops that are listed for sale.

BC premier believes a newly created rental protection fund will keep thousands of rental units from slipping into the hands of "housing speculators and profiteers" for decades to come.

If they did this for hard working people that'd be one thing but they tend to prioritize people who do the least work and the most drugs and crime.  They even include supervised drug consumption rooms for them.

[james_s]

It's not always up to the cities to make those decisions.

Provincial governments sometimes make slums despite strong opposition from the local taxpayers and their city councils.  They even use numbered companies to hide their identity when purchasing.

When city councils push back, the province threatens to set up tent cities and override zoning decisions.

The locals hate it but many voters want to live in the best areas without paying the market rate.  The provincial government of BC just announced $500M to buy their votes.

to provide one time, capital grants to non-profit housing organizations to purchase affordable rental buildings and co-ops that are listed for sale.

BC premier believes a newly created rental protection fund will keep thousands of rental units from slipping into the hands of "housing speculators and profiteers" for decades to come.

If they did this for hard working people that'd be one thing but they tend to prioritize people who do the least work and the most drugs and crime.  They even include supervised drug consumption rooms for them.

They're trying to do something like that in my state. Our awful governor that has been in office for a decade has been pushing a bill that would allow construction of 4-plexes in all residential neighborhoods in cities with over 6000 residents which would include my neighborhood. This is infuriating because I bought a home on a dead end street in a suburban neighborhood zoned for single family homes specifically because that's what I want to live in. If multifamily homes were allowed at the time I wouldn't have bought there. Governments shouldn't be able to change the zoning of a neighborhood without a vote from the people that live there.