What is the Importance of Making Tax Digital for Businesses?

As digital technology continues to evolve there are revolutionary changes in the business world. Advanced software allows huge volumes of work to be done in short durations of time and paperwork has become a thing of the past.

Government’s around the world have embraced these advancements, using new initiatives to design and transform the tax systems in their countries by digitalising them. As a result, individuals and businesses are now able to file their VAT (Value Added Tax) returns easily and maintain their records using compatible digital tax software.

Businesses that are VAT registered are expected to use the digital tax platform, reducing the occurrence of errors and ensuring that an accurate amount of tax is paid in due time.

Some businesses may be apprehensive about the change in systems but it is essential to keep in mind the advantages that will come with the initiative. Some of the benefits of Making Tax Digital for businesses include:

  1.    Say goodbye to paperwork

Have you ever tried looking for a specific document in a huge pile of files? Searching for physical copies of documents can be a time-consuming process. Making Tax Digital compliant software allows the automation of financial records in your business and also allows you to make updates easily. With all of your data in one place, it becomes easier to get any information that you want – giving a higher level of transparency for both the government and your business.

  1.    Reduce errors

Avoidable tax mistakes can cost your company a fortune. With paperwork, there can be a huge number of errors but when using digital tax software businesses are able to avoid mistakes easily by keeping accurate and clear records of data. Additionally, digital tax software will keep you updated on any deadlines for filing your returns, preventing you from incurring any penalties.

  1.    Easy accessibility

The Making Tax Digital initiative has enabled businesses to easily access its platform and search for any information required. Businesses are now able to keep track of repayments, liabilities and any tax due with a system that is easy to navigate and understand. Minimise risk by continuously accessing the platform, keeping up-to-date with notifications and avoiding any penalties. Using a compatible Making Tax Digital software, business owners can enjoy a seamless and simple experience with their financial solutions.

  1.    Being in the cloud can result in growth

MTD for VAT‘s main focus is on business compliance but it can also help enable growth. Submitting tax digitally using cloud business tools can increase the revenues of the business – helping them achieve their goals. Additionally, businesses gain control and visibility over their information, becoming more consolidated with the industries in which they are in.

  1.    Save time and resources

Time is money! The automation of tax compliance services enables businesses to save a huge amount of time and resources. Log in from anywhere, using any device – increasing productivity for your business.

When a Lawyer’s Zeal Matters More than His Oath: The Case of Frederick Oberlander

In a 2010 legal dispute over the meaning of full disclosure, a real property investment firm found itself on the receiving end of a complaint regarding the history of one of its partners, Felix Slater. The accusation–levied by New York attorney Frederick Oberlander–contended that the company, involved in capital projects like the Trump SoHo hotel, kept the native Russian’s criminal record under wraps. The ensuing months and years saw Oberlander in and out of court regarding his original petition. Upon careful scrutiny of the actions and articles posted on this website, however, Oberlander’s representations appear less credible and more disingenuous.


Court documents reveal, for one thing, that Oberlander’s actions as a lawyer in this matter may have crossed the line in terms of professional conduct. Most telling was his unauthorized employment of confidential information from Sater’s criminal records–records quarantined from use by a federal judge in recognition of Sater’s willing and far-reaching cooperation with U.S. attorneys. When apprised of Oberlander’s unlawful release of the sealed material, the district court, backed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit, enjoined the lawyer from further leaking. This appellate court sits in New York City and hears cases from parts of New York State, Connecticut and Vermont.

Five years after the initial complaint by Oberlander, the district court hearing the case ordered penalties against him while simultaneously voiding most of Oberlander’s accusations. When handing down the sanctions, the court reminded the lawyer that he had–more than once–disobeyed judicial instructions to answer whether or not the original charges were based on evidence obtained from sealed criminal files. Given his stubborn refusal to provide answers to the court, Oberlander now finds himself under investigation for the manner in which he conducted himself relative to his petition against the real estate firm regarding Sater.

Beyond these inquiries, his actions were brought to the attention of a federal practice grievance tribunal for the purpose of considering license suspension or disbarment. In a lengthy and comprehensive edict, the grievance panel determined that Oberlander did indeed act against the law; prejudiced the strict administration of justice; and committed numerous infractions against accepted legal standards. By continuously ignoring judicial instruction, making sealed information public and threatening to do so to coerce a settlement, Oberlander earned for himself a one-year suspension of his license to practice law.

Yet this sanction does not end Oberlander’s troubles. Represented by his friend and colleague, Richard Lerner, Oberlander became radioactive as his activities became more widely known in the legal community. In fact, Lerner’s firm–Wilson Elsner–dismissed the attorney because Lerner insisted on retaining Oberlander as a client. Moreover, the firm removed its name from all documents related to Oberlander’s defense. That this highly esteemed firm took such pains to put distance between itself and Frederick Oberlander makes a bold statement about the latter’s growing infamy.

To lift Oberlander’s suspension would, given his less than sterling character, free him up to resume his shady and unscrupulous tactics. Courts cannot afford this activity again.


Court documents reveal, for one thing, that Oberlander’s actions as a lawyer in this matter may have crossed the line in terms of professional conduct. Most telling was his unauthorized employment of confidential information from Sater’s criminal records–records quarantined from use by a federal judge in recognition of Sater’s willing and far-reaching cooperation with U.S. attorneys. When apprised of Oberlander’s unlawful release of the sealed material, the district court, backed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit, enjoined the lawyer from further leaking. This appellate court sits in New York City and hears cases from parts of New York State, Connecticut and Vermont.



Five years after the initial complaint by Oberlander, the district court hearing the case ordered penalties against him while simultaneously voiding most of Oberlander’s accusations. When handing down the sanctions, the court reminded the lawyer that he had–more than once–disobeyed judicial instructions to answer whether or not the original charges were based on evidence obtained from sealed criminal files. Given his stubborn refusal to provide answers to the court, Oberlander now finds himself under investigation for the manner in which he conducted himself relative to his petition against the real estate firm regarding Sater.

Beyond these inquiries, his actions were brought to the attention of a federal practice grievance tribunal for the purpose of considering license suspension or disbarment. In a lengthy and comprehensive edict, the grievance panel determined that Oberlander did indeed act against the law; prejudiced the strict administration of justice; and committed numerous infractions against accepted legal standards. By continuously ignoring judicial instruction, making sealed information public and threatening to do so to coerce a settlement, Oberlander earned for himself a one-year suspension of his license to practice law.

Yet this sanction does not end Oberlander’s troubles. Represented by his friend and colleague, Richard Lerner, Oberlander became radioactive as his activities became more widely known in the legal community. In fact, Lerner’s firm–Wilson Elsner–dismissed the attorney because Lerner insisted on retaining Oberlander as a client. Moreover, the firm removed its name from all documents related to Oberlander’s defense. That this highly esteemed firm took such pains to put distance between itself and Frederick Oberlander makes a bold statement about the latter’s growing infamy.

To lift Oberlander’s suspension would, given his less than sterling character, free him up to resume his shady and unscrupulous tactics. Courts cannot afford this activity again.