|
Post by a more piratey game on Sept 5, 2017 13:08:17 GMT
I understand that if you build a new stadium you don't pay VAT, but if you redevelop it you do. Is this correct? I think its the opposite - based on the fact that a friend of mine completely re-did his house apart from a couple of walls, which he kept in order to make it a 're-development' and not pay VAT
|
|
Angas
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 2,066
|
Post by Angas on Sept 5, 2017 13:15:44 GMT
Developers beware: Courts give narrow definition of ‘new build’ for VAT purposes. August 10, 2017 | Chris Kerr The Upper Tribunal recently ordered a developer to pay VAT on a redeveloped dwelling after deciding it was a reconstruction of an existing building rather than a new build[1]. The decision is a reminder to developers to be sure about whether they are constructing a new dwelling or renovating an existing one. The latter will be subject to VAT at 20% which can have a big impact on margins and profitability of the development. To VAT or not to VAT? The construction of a new residential building will not be subject to VAT[2]. VAT will be due on any other works including conversions, reconstructions, extensions or alterations of an existing building. A building only ceases to exist when it is completely demolished, except for one façade (or two if it is a corner plot), where required by planning permission. www.djblaw.co.uk/single-post/2017/08/10/Developers-beware-Courts-give-narrow-definition-of-%E2%80%98new-build%E2%80%99-for-VAT-purposes?nID=72
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Sept 5, 2017 13:30:44 GMT
seems like you had it right first time LPG - thanks Angas
|
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Sept 5, 2017 13:52:01 GMT
seems like you had it right first time LPG - thanks Angas Maybe we will pay cash in hand
|
|
|
Post by Colyton Gas. on Sept 5, 2017 14:39:53 GMT
Has the re-build started yet!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by PessimistGas on Sept 5, 2017 15:10:57 GMT
Has the re-build started yet!!!!!!!!!!! No, but the funding is in place and has been for some time.
|
|
|
Post by alloutofgas on Sept 5, 2017 15:52:56 GMT
tell that to my neighbour, she is about to loose her job due to budget cuts Sorry Henbury, but it's 'lose'
|
|
|
Post by PessimistGas on Sept 5, 2017 17:07:33 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Sept 5, 2017 18:17:43 GMT
Wael said it was important that the club owned their own stadium. I think he meant he land, which UWE wanted to hang on to and charge us a "peppercorn rent" Also what seems along time ago now I was told by and ex director that UWE would take the money from the car park, and bars. Also they wanted access to the stadium at all times because rovers had agreed that a jogging track would be built. The stadium would also include a gym which students would have access too. UWE thought it would be a community stadium, being their community. Rovers obviously want a ground that makes money for them, no one else. How does it go? no deal is better than a bad deal, and I have to agree on that. Given it was going to be called the UWE Stadium and built on their land you have to assume the students would have some access to the facilities, otherwise how where they going to use the stadium to attract new students if they could never use the facilities at the stadium. At some point in the past the UWE clearly felt the stadium was a good idea for them, if they apparently approached the club with the idea in the first place or, if they didn't, they clearly sat down and discussed the plans at length with the club. If they can only use the former HP land for students the stadium project made perfect sense as it allowed them to get a decent income stream without having to hand over money back to HP if they sold the land for residential or commercial development. Anyway what I can't get my head around is where the £30m+ is going to come from to redevelop, or £50m+ if it's still planned to be world class, if they couldn't come to an agreement with the UWE which could be financed with the £15m or so they could get from selling the Mem. Given debts already are around £10m, getting pp and rebuilding the Mem will cost a minimum of £30m/40m and then a further £5m/10m at The Colony so potentially £50m+ to be spent in the next 5 years but meanwhile there's no signs of any real investment on 1st team squad players etc.
|
|
eppinggas
Administrator
Ian Alexander
Don't care
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 8,053
Member is Online
|
Post by eppinggas on Sept 5, 2017 18:35:07 GMT
The £30mil will come from that lovely Jeremy Corbyn, who is going to let Dwane Sports borrow his money tree.
|
|
GasMacc1
Les Bradd
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,423
|
Post by GasMacc1 on Sept 5, 2017 18:37:09 GMT
When we were all friends and the outline plans were first mooted, I think I remember that South Glos Council had a stadium as part of their strategic plan for the region. I was disappointed that they made no comment as the negotiations went quiet, let alone UWE. Is a stadium still part of the South Glos vision? Who are they expecting to build one? Could South Glos have done more? Did they play a role, but decided not to comment about it?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2017 19:43:56 GMT
When we were all friends and the outline plans were first mooted, I think I remember that South Glos Council had a stadium as part of their strategic plan for the region. I was disappointed that they made no comment as the negotiations went quiet, let alone UWE. Is a stadium still part of the South Glos vision? Who are they expecting to build one? Could South Glos have done more? Did they play a role, but decided not to comment about it? That's another thing I never understood. Why on Earth does South Gloucestershire "strategically" need a stadium?
|
|
|
Post by PessimistGas on Sept 5, 2017 20:39:08 GMT
When we were all friends and the outline plans were first mooted, I think I remember that South Glos Council had a stadium as part of their strategic plan for the region. I was disappointed that they made no comment as the negotiations went quiet, let alone UWE. Is a stadium still part of the South Glos vision? Who are they expecting to build one? Could South Glos have done more? Did they play a role, but decided not to comment about it? That's another thing I never understood. Why on Earth does South Gloucestershire "strategically" need a stadium? Prestige, economic benefits, cultural benefits, employment opportunities, facilities for local people, improved access to sport for local people, educational facilities, exhibition and conferencing facilities.....
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2017 20:53:47 GMT
That's another thing I never understood. Why on Earth does South Gloucestershire "strategically" need a stadium? Prestige, economic benefits, cultural benefits, employment opportunities, facilities for local people, improved access to sport for local people, educational facilities, exhibition and conferencing facilities..... Yes, that's what they'd say too. I'm not convinced by any of it, but I'm impressed by the playing fields on Pomphrey Hill.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2017 22:24:49 GMT
seems like you had it right first time LPG - thanks Angas Maybe we will pay cash in hand Or not pay at all 😂
|
|
|
Post by Henbury Gas on Sept 6, 2017 7:17:23 GMT
tell that to my neighbour, she is about to loose her job due to budget cuts Sorry Henbury, but it's 'lose' Prodicktive programmes are a ummer....
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Sept 6, 2017 18:36:10 GMT
That's another thing I never understood. Why on Earth does South Gloucestershire "strategically" need a stadium? Prestige, economic benefits, cultural benefits, employment opportunities, facilities for local people, improved access to sport for local people, educational facilities, exhibition and conferencing facilities..... What prestige, economic etc benefits would a 22K seat stadium bring to S Glos if Rovers stayed in there native City, was the strategic plan built around the stadium plans rather than vice a versa? Regardless unless S Glos intended supplying the land &/or finance towards the stadium I can't see what it has to do with their plans!
|
|
kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,236
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Sept 6, 2017 18:41:17 GMT
Has the re-build started yet!!!!!!!!!!! Just need to nip to the builders merchants for some materials. The builders promise they'll be back
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2017 19:03:03 GMT
In what way? Wael made some nebulous comments about 1 step forward and 4 back, but didn't say who caused the 4 backwards steps. UWE put out a statement which didn't align with what Rovers said, Wael didn't seem bothered enough about it to put the record straight. UWE made it clear that they were still willing to discuss the project, Hamer had said 'never say never', Wael said 'no'. Draw your own conclusions. Where are the BBC inteviews, or the Bristol Post interviews with some relevant person at UWE? Steve Hamer and Wael have been asked and interviewed about it. No one seems to have sought any info from UWE. All we have is tbeir statement that doesnt reconcile with Rovers version. UWEs role (wernt we supposed to be partners under Higgs originally) either seems to have been forgotten about or wilfully ignored IMO Regardless of the answers and what anyone beleives, Rovers are the only ones that have been asked any questions that i know off Simon There was an interview on local news with the vice chancellor of the university on the day rovers pulled out saying they would continue the discussions with the council about moving things forward and the door remains open for rovers
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2017 19:17:58 GMT
Wael said it was important that the club owned their own stadium. I think he meant he land, which UWE wanted to hang on to and charge us a "peppercorn rent" Also what seems along time ago now I was told by and ex director that UWE would take the money from the car park, and bars. Also they wanted access to the stadium at all times because rovers had agreed that a jogging track would be built. The stadium would also include a gym which students would have access too. UWE thought it would be a community stadium, being their community. Rovers obviously want a ground that makes money for them, no one else. How does it go? no deal is better than a bad deal, and I have to agree on that. I think you have posted before LPGas about the ex director telling you what UWE apparently wanted from the deal but I find it very hard to believe what he said. When you lease land or a building the terms are very specific and usually pinpoint the fact that, within certain parameters, the landlord permits the tenant to carry on his business without interference. Would UWE really have the time or resources to monitor bar takings to make sure they got their cut ? And the Sainsburys court case documents revealed that Rovers planned to lease the gym to a third party operator so it's hardly likely students would be given free access. Of course there were crossovers between UWE and Rovers but these were known from the outset and mainly involved Rovers leasing teaching space to UWE and UWE having use of the car park at certain times. Although one of Nick Higgs' biggest critics I have to say he seemed to have created the basis of a good deal for Rovers with the UWE Stadium plan but it depended entirely on getting 29 million from Sainsburys which would have been put into the project as equity capital. The line being put forward now is that the project was discovered to be non-viable or "not good for Rovers" and to give the impression the other party are to blame. But if you take 18 million equity out of the equation ( Mem value 29 million - Mem value 11 million) and replace it with 18 million of debt the finance costs alone are bound to have a crucial effect on the viability.
Sorry if I'm missing something here, but they only agreed to buy the club after the result of the action against Sainsbury's was known (or maybe subject to that result). Did they have another nutter lined up who promised to pay £29m for the Mem who has since come to his senses? Or did they just buy without even having the Mem valued or sighting the existing contract with UWE?
|
|