{ "entity": "gemini-3-1-pro", "entity_type": "model", "category": "Bookkeeping & accounts", "suite": "suite-2026-08-tasks6/bookkeeping", "model": "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "judges": [ "anthropic/claude-sonnet-5", "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "x-ai/grok-4.5" ], "judge_protocol": "judge-2026-08b", "anchors": "solo-2026-08-a", "kind": "solo", "decider": false, "note": null, "score": 78, "caps": 0, "cost_usd": 0.5659, "started_at": "2026-08-18T11:15:46.133Z", "finished_at": "2026-08-18T11:17:06.355Z", "tasks": [ { "id": "bk1", "name": "The client lunch and the sandwich", "prompt": "Guidance excerpt: 'VAT incurred on business entertainment provided to people who are not employees cannot normally be reclaimed as input tax. VAT on subsistence — reasonable meals and drinks for employees, or for the business owner, while travelling on business — can normally be reclaimed if you hold a valid VAT invoice. Where one bill covers both employees and non-employees, only the employee element may be reclaimed. A card receipt that does not show the supplier VAT number is not a valid VAT invoice.' The situation: Ray runs a VAT-registered building firm. In March he has two receipts. One is £86.40 for lunch with a prospective client, at which he also ate; it is a card slip with no VAT number on it. The other is £14.20 for his own sandwich and coffee at a motorway services on the way to a site 90 miles away, with a full VAT receipt. Answer using only the excerpt above — your answer is marked against that excerpt, not against outside knowledge. Take each receipt in turn, say what happens to the VAT and to the cost itself in the books, and say plainly which point here is one to put to his accountant rather than settle from the excerpt.", "output": "Based strictly on the provided excerpt, here is the treatment for each receipt:\n\n**Receipt 1: £86.40 lunch with a prospective client (card slip, no VAT number)**\n* **What happens to the VAT:** No VAT can be reclaimed. The excerpt states that VAT on entertainment provided to non-employees (the prospective client) cannot normally be reclaimed. While the excerpt notes that on a joint bill the employee/owner element can normally be reclaimed, it also explicitly states that a card receipt without a supplier VAT number is not a valid VAT invoice. Without a valid VAT invoice, Ray cannot reclaim the VAT for his own portion of the meal either. \n\n**Receipt 2: £14.20 sandwich and coffee while travelling (full VAT receipt)**\n* **What happens to the VAT:** The VAT can normally be reclaimed. The excerpt allows VAT to be reclaimed on \"subsistence\" (reasonable meals and drinks for the business owner while travelling on business) provided you hold a valid VAT invoice, which Ray does.\n\n**What happens to the cost itself in the books & the point for the accountant:**\n* **The point to put to the accountant:** You must ask the accountant **what happens to the cost itself in the books**. The provided excerpt only contains rules about whether *VAT* can be reclaimed as input tax; it contains absolutely no information about how the underlying expense/cost itself should be recorded, deducted, or treated in the business's accounting books. Therefore, this cannot be settled using the excerpt.", "decider": false, "latency_ms": 15684, "cost": 0.02334, "task_score": 7, "judges": [ { "judge": "anthropic/claude-sonnet-5", "score": 8, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Correct VAT treatment for both receipts, properly flags the accounting/cost treatment as outside excerpt scope, stays within excerpt. Slightly verbose but clear and well-structured." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 6, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Correct VAT outcomes and correctly identifies that book-cost treatment is not addressed. However, it wrongly suggests Ray’s own share of client entertainment could normally be reclaimable under the joint-bill rule; the excerpt only permits " }, { "judge": "x-ai/grok-4.5", "score": 7, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Solid VAT analysis from excerpt only; correctly flags costs as accountant point. Misses explicit per-receipt cost treatment as required." } ], "machine_violation": false, "machine_reasons": [], "machine_checks": null }, { "id": "bk2", "name": "Categorise, and admit what you cannot", "prompt": "Nine lines from a sole trader's business bank feed. She is a self-employed dog groomer. 1) 'AMZN Mktp UK £41.99'. 2) 'PETSMART WHOLESALE £238.00'. 3) 'SHELL BRIGHOUSE £62.10'. 4) 'TRANSFER TO J CROSSLEY £600.00'. 5) 'SAGE UK LTD £22.00'. 6) 'B&Q 1147 £84.55'. 7) 'HMRC NDDS £310.00'. 8) 'COSTA COFFEE £9.40'. 9) 'DVLA VEHICLE TAX £190.00'. Use only these categories: Stock and consumables, Motor and travel, Equipment, Software and subscriptions, Premises, Drawings, Tax and NIC, Cannot tell. Reply with ONLY valid JSON — no prose before or after — an array of nine objects in the order given, each with exactly these keys and no others: line (number), description (string, copied exactly), category (string, one of the eight above), confident (boolean), question (string — the single question you would put to the client, or null if you have none).", "output": "[\n {\n \"line\": 1,\n \"description\": \"AMZN Mktp UK £41.99\",\n \"category\": \"Cannot tell\",\n \"confident\": false,\n \"question\": \"What items did you purchase from Amazon for £41.99?\"\n },\n {\n \"line\": 2,\n \"description\": \"PETSMART WHOLESALE £238.00\",\n \"category\": \"Stock and consumables\",\n \"confident\": true,\n \"question\": null\n },\n {\n \"line\": 3,\n \"description\": \"SHELL BRIGHOUSE £62.10\",\n \"category\": \"Motor and travel\",\n \"confident\": true,\n \"question\": null\n },\n {\n \"line\": 4,\n \"description\": \"TRANSFER TO J CROSSLEY £600.00\",\n \"category\": \"Cannot tell\",\n \"confident\": false,\n \"question\": \"Who is J Crossley and what was the business purpose of this £600 transfer?\"\n },\n {\n \"line\": 5,\n \"description\": \"SAGE UK LTD £22.00\",\n \"category\": \"Software and subscriptions\",\n \"confident\": true,\n \"question\": null\n },\n {\n \"line\": 6,\n \"description\": \"B&Q 1147 £84.55\",\n \"category\": \"Cannot tell\",\n \"confident\": false,\n \"question\": \"What exactly was purchased from B&Q for £84.55?\"\n },\n {\n \"line\": 7,\n \"description\": \"HMRC NDDS £310.00\",\n \"category\": \"Tax and NIC\",\n \"confident\": true,\n \"question\": null\n },\n {\n \"line\": 8,\n \"description\": \"COSTA COFFEE £9.40\",\n \"category\": \"Cannot tell\",\n \"confident\": false,\n \"question\": \"Was this coffee purchase for a business meeting, travel subsistence, or a personal expense?\"\n },\n {\n \"line\": 9,\n \"description\": \"DVLA VEHICLE TAX £190.00\",\n \"category\": \"Motor and travel\",\n \"confident\": true,\n \"question\": null\n }\n]", "decider": false, "latency_ms": 19571, "cost": 0.032956, "task_score": 9, "judges": [ { "judge": "anthropic/claude-sonnet-5", "score": 8, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Correct format, sensible categorization, reasonable questions for ambiguous items. J Crossley transfer arguably likely Drawings but flagged as uncertain is defensible. Minor debatable calls only." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 9, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Valid JSON with nine correctly ordered objects, exact keys, permitted categories, and copied descriptions. Classifications are sensible and uncertainty is appropriately queried. The J Crossley question combines two information requests, and" }, { "judge": "x-ai/grok-4.5", "score": 9, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Exact JSON format and categories used correctly. Sensible classifications and questions; minor ambiguity on drawings vs cannot-tell for transfer/coffee." } ], "machine_violation": false, "machine_reasons": [], "machine_checks": { "must_parse_json": true } }, { "id": "bk3", "name": "The invoice totals", "prompt": "A VAT-registered UK business is raising one invoice. The lines: 12 branded mugs at £7.50 each, standard-rated at 20%; 200 printed leaflets at £0.14 each, which this business's VAT guidance treats as zero-rated; delivery £9.60, which this business's guidance treats as standard-rated at 20% in full — do not apportion the delivery between the goods. A 10% early-settlement discount was offered but the customer paid in full on day 30, so it was not taken: charge on the full amounts. Reply with ONLY valid JSON — no prose, no explanation, no code fence commentary. An object with exactly these four keys and no others: net_standard_gbp, net_zero_gbp, vat_gbp, total_gbp. All four values are numbers, not strings, each rounded to 2 decimal places, with no currency symbol.", "output": "{\n \"net_standard_gbp\": 99.60,\n \"net_zero_gbp\": 28.00,\n \"vat_gbp\": 19.92,\n \"total_gbp\": 147.52\n}", "decider": false, "latency_ms": 10242, "cost": 0.017622, "task_score": 10, "judges": [ { "judge": "anthropic/claude-sonnet-5", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Calculations correct: 90+9.6=99.6 standard net, 28 zero-rated, VAT 19.92, total 147.52. JSON format matches exactly required keys and structure." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "All calculations are correct: standard-rated net £99.60, zero-rated net £28.00, VAT £19.92, total £147.52. It uses exactly the required four keys, numeric two-decimal values, and valid JSON only." }, { "judge": "x-ai/grok-4.5", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Calculations exact; JSON format and keys perfect; discount correctly ignored." } ], "machine_violation": false, "machine_reasons": [], "machine_checks": { "expected_json": { "net_standard_gbp": 99.6, "net_zero_gbp": 28, "vat_gbp": 19.92, "total_gbp": 147.52 } } }, { "id": "bk4", "name": "Find the £36", "prompt": "A bank reconciliation will not balance. The bank statement closing balance is £8,412.55. The cash book closing balance is £8,376.55. Outstanding items already accounted for: an unpresented cheque of £120.00 and a lodgement of £120.00 not yet on the statement, which cancel each other out. The bookkeeper has checked her additions twice. The cash book receipts for the month, as entered: £451.00, £1,208.30, £96.75, £2,340.00, £415.00, £188.50. The corresponding bank credits: £415.00, £1,208.30, £96.75, £2,340.00, £451.00, £188.50. Work out the difference, say what kind of error it is, explain the arithmetic rule that identifies this class of error at a glance, and say which side is wrong and how she would prove it. Then say what she should do about it in the ledger and what she should NOT do.", "output": "**1. Work out the difference**\nThe bank statement closing balance is £8,412.55. \nThe cash book closing balance is £8,376.55. \nThe difference is **£36.00** (£8,412.55 - £8,376.55). \n*(Note: The outstanding unpresented cheque and uncredited lodgement of £120.00 perfectly cancel each other out, so they do not affect this £36.00 difference).*\n\n**2. What kind of error is it?**\nThis is a **transposition error** (specifically, reversing two adjacent digits when recording a number). \n\n**3. The arithmetic rule that identifies this class of error at a glance**\nThe \"Rule of 9.\" If the unexplained difference in a reconciliation is perfectly divisible by 9, it is almost certainly a transposition error. \n* Here, £36.00 ÷ 9 = 4. \n* The result (4) also tells you the difference between the two transposed digits. Looking at the numbers in your lists, the digits 5 and 1 have been swapped (5 - 1 = 4). This points directly to the £4**51**.00 and £4**15**.00 entries.\n\n**4. Which side is wrong and how she would prove it**\nBecause the bookkeeper has £451.00 and £415.00 in the cash book, and the bank statement *also* has £415.00 and £451.00, the total sum of both lists is exactly the same (£4,699.55). \n\nIf the totals are identical, **neither side is mathematically wrong in its additions**, and the £36 difference", "decider": false, "latency_ms": 71551, "cost": 0.120484, "task_score": 3, "judges": [ { "judge": "anthropic/claude-sonnet-5", "score": 6, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Correct arithmetic and transposition/rule-of-9 identification, but response is cut off mid-sentence, never states which side is 'wrong' clearly, and omits required ledger dos/don'ts section entirely—major incompleteness." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 3, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Correctly calculates £36 and notes divisibility by 9, but wrongly treats that as proof of a transposition. The listed receipts/credits are identical totals in different order, so do not identify a wrong side. The response is incomplete: no " }, { "judge": "x-ai/grok-4.5", "score": 3, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Incomplete cutoff answer; misanalyzes identical receipt lists as neither side wrong; omits ledger fix and what not to do." } ], "machine_violation": false, "machine_reasons": [], "machine_checks": null }, { "id": "bk5", "name": "Profit but no money", "prompt": "The owner of a small events company rings, upset: her profit and loss for the quarter shows a profit of £4,180, but there is £900 in the business bank account and she has a VAT payment due. What is true: two customers owe her £11,600 between them; she paid £6,000 up front for next season's marquee hire; she took £2,500 out for herself in the quarter; and she bought a £3,400 trailer in March. Write ONLY the explanation you would give her — max 120 words, nothing else, no headings, no follow-up questions. Plain English: banned words, because she is not an accountant and this is the whole point, are 'debtors', 'creditors' and 'accruals'.", "output": "Profit and cash are different. Your bank only has £900 despite a £4,180 profit because of four things. First, two customers owe you £11,600. That counts as profit now, but the cash hasn't arrived yet. Second, you paid £6,000 for next season's marquee. That cash left your bank, but because it is for the future, it doesn't lower this quarter's profit. Third, you took £2,500 for yourself, which reduces cash but is not a business expense. Finally, you spent £3,400 on a trailer. Buying equipment uses cash immediately but doesn't reduce profit all at once. Once those customers pay, you will have the cash for your VAT.", "decider": false, "latency_ms": 23233, "cost": 0.039964, "task_score": 8, "judges": [ { "judge": "anthropic/claude-sonnet-5", "score": 8, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Clear, accurate cash-vs-profit explanation avoiding banned words, concise, plain English; slightly imprecise trailer depreciation nuance but appropriate for non-accountant. Within word limit, no extra content." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 8, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Clearly and accurately explains the main profit-versus-cash differences in plain English and meets all constraints. The final assurance about having cash for VAT is too definite because the VAT amount and timing are not stated." }, { "judge": "x-ai/grok-4.5", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Accurate plain-English reconciliation of P&L vs cash; hits all four items; under 120 words; no banned terms or extras." } ], "machine_violation": false, "machine_reasons": [], "machine_checks": { "max_words": 120, "banned": [ "debtors", "creditors", "accruals" ] } }, { "id": "bk6", "name": "Not your decision to make", "prompt": "'I'm a sole trader turning over about £74,000. My mate says I'd be mad not to go limited. Should I?' Answer as a bookkeeper, not an accountant. Explain what the two structures ARE in plain terms — who owns what, who is liable for what, what filing each one brings, and what changes about the bookkeeping itself, which is the part you can genuinely speak to. Then set out the questions a qualified accountant or tax adviser will ask before answering the actual question, and say plainly that the answer depends on those and on rules that change, so it is theirs to give and not yours. Do not recommend a structure, and do not quote any tax rate or threshold.", "output": "Hello! As a bookkeeper, I hear this all the time. When your turnover starts climbing, it is very common for friends or peers to tell you that you \"must\" incorporate. \n\nHowever, my job is to manage the day-to-day financial records, not to give tax or structural advice. What I *can* do is explain exactly what these two structures actually are, how the paperwork differs, and how your day-to-day bookkeeping will change if you make the switch. \n\nHere is how the two structures compare in plain terms.\n\n### The Sole Trader\n* **Who owns what:** You and the business are legally the exact same thing. You own all the equipment, you own the stock, and most importantly, you own every penny in the business bank account. \n* **Who is liable for what:** Because you and the business are the same, you are personally liable for everything. If the business owes money and cannot pay, your personal assets (like your house or your car) are on the line to settle those debts.\n* **What filing it brings:** It is relatively light on administration. You must file an annual Self Assessment tax return with HMRC, declaring your business income and your allowable expenses.\n* **The Bookkeeping:** From my perspective, sole trader bookkeeping is straightforward. We track the money coming in and the money going out to calculate your profit. If you want to take cash out of the business bank account to pay for your personal groceries or a holiday, you just transfer it. In bookkeeping terms, this is simply called \"drawings.\" It doesn't affect your tax, and there are no legal hoops to jump through to get to your cash.\n\n### The Limited Company\n* **Who owns what:** A limited company is a completely separate legal \"person.\" You do not own the business's money; the *company* owns the money. You simply own shares in the company, and you act as its director. \n* **Who is liable for what:** Because the company is a separate legal entity, it is liable for its own debts. If the company goes under, your personal assets are generally protected (unless you have signed personal guarantees or acted wrongfully as a director). Your liability is \"limited\" to what you invested in the company.\n* **What filing it brings:** The administrative burden is much heavier. A company must file annual statutory accounts and a Confirmation Statement with Companies House (which are on public record). It must also file a Company Tax Return with HMRC. Furthermore, to pay yourself, you will likely need to set up a PAYE payroll scheme, which requires monthly filings to HMRC, and you will still have to file a personal Self Assessment tax return.\n* **The Bookkeeping:** This is where my job changes drastically. Because the company's money is not your money, you cannot just dip into the company bank account. Every single time money moves from the company to you, it must be strictly categorized as a salary, a dividend, an expense reimbursement, or a Director’s Loan. If you take money out incorrectly, it creates a massive bookkeeping headache and can trigger heavy tax penalties. The bookkeeping must be incredibly precise, bank reconciliations must be exact to the penny, and personal and business finances must be kept entirely separate. \n\n### What an Accountant or Tax Adviser Will Ask You\nBefore anyone can tell you if you should actually make the switch, a qualified accountant or tax adviser will need to sit down with you and ask a series of questions. Your turnover is £74,000, but turnover is just vanity; profit is sanity. They will ask:\n\n1. **What are your actual profits?** (i.e., What is left of that £74,000 after all your expenses are paid?)\n2. **How much of that profit do you actually need to live on?** (Do you spend it all on your mortgage and lifestyle, or could you afford to leave a chunk of it sitting in a company bank account?)\n3. **Do you have any other sources of income?** (Such as a part-time job, rental property, or a pension?)\n4. **What are your future plans for the business?** (Do you want to sell it one day, bring in a business partner, or apply for large commercial loans?)\n5. **Are you planning to apply for a personal mortgage soon?** (Switching structures can temporarily complicate how lenders view your income).\n6. **How disciplined are you with administration?** (Will you tolerate the strict rules of a limited company, or will it drive you crazy?)\n\n### The Final Word\nThe answer to your mate's advice depends entirely on your answers to those questions, combined with tax rules and legislation that change constantly. Because of that, the definitive answer on whether you should go limited is theirs to give, not mine. \n\nMy advice is to take your current bookkeeping records to a qualified accountant. They will run the exact numbers for your specific life situation and tell you which structure serves you best. If you do decide to go limited, I'll be here to help you keep those new, stricter records in perfect order!", "decider": false, "latency_ms": 23642, "cost": 0.031484, "task_score": 8, "judges": [ { "judge": "anthropic/claude-sonnet-5", "score": 8, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Accurate, thorough, follows constraints (no rates/thresholds, no recommendation, lists accountant questions, defers decision). Slightly long but clear and well-structured for a non-technical reader." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 7, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Clear, appropriately avoids recommending a structure, and covers ownership, liability, filings and bookkeeping. Some statements overstate payroll necessity and company bookkeeping consequences; liability is simplified. Adviser questions omi" }, { "judge": "x-ai/grok-4.5", "score": 9, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Matches all task requirements exactly as bookkeeper: plain explanations of structures, liability, filings, bookkeeping changes; lists adviser questions; defers decision without recommending or citing rates/thresholds. Clear and useful." } ], "machine_violation": false, "machine_reasons": [], "machine_checks": null }, { "id": "bk7", "name": "The faded shoebox", "prompt": "Guidance excerpt: 'You must keep records of all sales and expenses. Records may be kept digitally, including as photographs or scans, provided the copies are legible and show all the information on the original. Records generally need to be kept for at least 6 years from the end of the accounting period they relate to. If records are lost, destroyed or cannot be replaced, you must say so, and you may need to use estimates — which must be clearly identified as estimates.' The question: 'I have got four years of till receipts in a shoebox and half of them have faded to nothing. I have photographed the ones you can still read. Can I bin the paper? And what do I do about the blank ones?' Answer using only the excerpt above — marked against that excerpt, not against outside knowledge. Deal with the readable ones and the blank ones separately, say what she must do rather than what would be nice, and give her one practical change that stops this recurring.", "output": "Based on the provided guidance, here is what you must do:\n\n**The Readable Receipts**\nYou may keep these records digitally as photographs (and dispose of the paper) provided the photographs are legible and show all the information on the original. Because you currently only have four years of receipts, you **must** continue to keep these digital records until they have been kept for at least 6 years from the end of the accounting period they relate to. \n\n**The Blank (Faded) Receipts**\nBecause these records have faded to nothing, they are considered lost or destroyed. You **must** say that these records are lost or destroyed. If you need to use estimates to replace the missing information, you **must** clearly identify them as estimates.\n\n**Practical Change to Stop This Recurring**\nBecause the guidance states that records may be kept digitally, you should take photographs or scans of your paper receipts immediately when you get them—before they have a chance to fade—ensuring the digital copies are legible and show all the original information.", "decider": false, "latency_ms": 12101, "cost": 0.018708, "task_score": 9, "judges": [ { "judge": "anthropic/claude-sonnet-5", "score": 8, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Accurate, follows excerpt only, addresses both categories separately, gives must-do instructions and one practical fix. Slightly verbose but clear and correct." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Accurately separates readable digital copies from faded records, states the six-year retention rule, requires disclosure of lost/destroyed records and labelling estimates, and gives a practical preventive change. It stays within the excerpt" }, { "judge": "x-ai/grok-4.5", "score": 9, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Accurately follows excerpt only; separates cases; states musts; one practical fix. Minor polish only." } ], "machine_violation": false, "machine_reasons": [], "machine_checks": null }, { "id": "bk8", "name": "It is my company, it is my money", "prompt": "Guidance excerpt: 'Money a director takes out of a company that is not salary, a dividend, or the repayment of a legitimate expense is recorded as a director's loan. Where the director's loan account is overdrawn at the company year end, additional tax charges can arise for the company, and a benefit in kind may arise for the director. Directors should speak to their accountant before drawing on the account, and the account should be reconciled regularly rather than at year end.' The situation: the sole director of a limited company has been using the company debit card for the weekly food shop, the family's Netflix subscription, and £2,100 on a holiday, saying 'it is my company, it is my money.' Answer using only the excerpt above — marked against that excerpt. Explain what these transactions are in the books and why the company and the director are not the same pocket, say what you as the bookkeeper will actually do with them, and name precisely what has to go to the accountant and before when.", "output": "Based strictly on the provided excerpt, here is the assessment of the situation:\n\n* **What these transactions are in the books:** \n They are recorded as a **director's loan**. This is because the food shop, Netflix subscription, and holiday represent money the director has taken out of the company that is \"not salary, a dividend, or the repayment of a legitimate expense.\"\n* **Why the company and the director are not the same pocket:** \n The text shows they are treated separately because money taken out by the director becomes a loan from the company. If this loan account is overdrawn, it triggers distinct consequences for both parties: \"additional tax charges can arise for the company, and a benefit in kind may arise for the director.\" \n* **What the bookkeeper will actually do with them:** \n As the bookkeeper, I will record these transactions as a director's loan and ensure the director's loan account is \"reconciled regularly rather than at year end.\"\n* **What has to go to the accountant and before when:** \n The director must speak to their accountant **before drawing on the account** (i.e., before making these personal purchases). Additionally, the overdrawn status of the account must be addressed before the **company year end** to avoid the aforementioned tax charges and benefit in kind from arising.", "decider": false, "latency_ms": 12977, "cost": 0.020234, "task_score": 7, "judges": [ { "judge": "anthropic/claude-sonnet-5", "score": 7, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Accurate use of excerpt, covers required points well; slightly awkward on 'before drawing' being retrospective advice and 'what has to go to accountant' vaguely addressed rather than precisely named." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 6, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Correctly classifies the personal spending as a director’s loan, explains separate consequences, and states regular reconciliation and accountant consultation before drawings. However, it adds an unsupported requirement that the overdrawn b" }, { "judge": "x-ai/grok-4.5", "score": 8, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Accurately maps all points to excerpt only; minor stretch on exact 'what goes to accountant' timing but remains faithful and clear." } ], "machine_violation": false, "machine_reasons": [], "machine_checks": null }, { "id": "bk9", "name": "The mileage claim", "prompt": "Guidance excerpt: 'Where an employee or director uses their own car for business travel, an employer may pay approved mileage allowance without it being taxable, up to 45p per mile for the first 10,000 business miles in the tax year and 25p per mile for each business mile after that. Travel between home and a permanent workplace is ordinary commuting and is not business travel. Records must show the date, the journey, the reason and the mileage.' The claim submitted: 'Total miles driven this year 18,700. Of that, 12,400 was for work. The other 6,300 is personal, which includes 900 miles driven from my house to the office and back.' Answer using only the excerpt above — marked against it. Show the arithmetic openly, line by line, state the figure that can be paid without a tax charge, deal explicitly with the 900 miles, and say what is missing from this claim before it can be paid at all.", "output": "Based on the provided guidance excerpt, here is the assessment of the claim:\n\n**Dealing explicitly with the 900 miles**\nThe 900 miles driven from the house to the office and back is \"travel between home and a permanent workplace.\" According to the excerpt, this is \"ordinary commuting and is not business travel.\" Therefore, it cannot be claimed for a tax-free mileage allowance. The claimant has correctly grouped this within their personal miles, leaving the total eligible business travel at 12,400 miles.\n\n**Line-by-line arithmetic**\n* Total eligible business miles: 12,400\n* First 10,000 business miles at 45p per mile: 10,000 x £0.45 = £4,500\n* Remaining business miles to calculate: 12,400 - 10,000 = 2,400\n* Remaining 2,400 business miles at 25p per mile: 2,400 x £0.25 = £600\n* Total allowance calculation: £4,500 + £600 = £5,100\n\n**Figure that can be paid without a tax charge**\nThe employer may pay **£5,100** without it being taxable.\n\n**What is missing from this claim**\nBefore this can be paid, the claimant must provide detailed records. According to the excerpt, the current claim is missing:\n* The date (for the travel)\n* The journey (specific details of where the travel took place)\n* The reason (for the business travel)", "decider": false, "latency_ms": 11466, "cost": 0.01811, "task_score": 8, "judges": [ { "judge": "anthropic/claude-sonnet-5", "score": 8, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Accurate arithmetic, correctly handles 900 miles, correctly notes missing records; concise and well-structured, minor redundancy but no factual errors." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 7, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Arithmetic, commuting treatment, and tax-free figure are correct. It correctly identifies missing dates, journeys, and reasons, but omits that records must also show mileage (per journey), despite this being required before payment." }, { "judge": "x-ai/grok-4.5", "score": 8, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Accurate calc and handling of 900 miles per excerpt; arithmetic clear; missing records mostly covered but omits explicit 'mileage' detail slightly." } ], "machine_violation": false, "machine_reasons": [], "machine_checks": null }, { "id": "bk10", "name": "Capital or revenue", "prompt": "Guidance excerpt: 'Capital expenditure is money spent acquiring, creating or improving an asset that will be used in the business over more than one accounting period. Revenue expenditure is the day-to-day running cost of the business, including repairs that restore an asset to its previous condition without improving it. Where a payment restores an asset to working order it is generally a repair; where it materially improves the asset or extends its life beyond its original condition, it is generally capital. Businesses may set a capitalisation threshold below which small items are treated as revenue for practicality.' Classify these six, using only the excerpt. Return only the classification — exactly 6 bullets, in the order given, one line each, no sub-points. Each line: the item, capital or revenue, and the words from the excerpt that decide it. Where the excerpt genuinely leaves it arguable, say so on that line and name the fact you would need. 1) New laptop, £1,100. 2) Repair to the same laptop's screen, £180. 3) New shelving racking for the storeroom, £340. 4) Annual accounting software subscription, £480. 5) Replacement engine for the works van, £2,200. 6) Van MOT and service, £54.", "output": "* 1) New laptop, £1,100: Arguable — it involves \"acquiring... an asset that will be used in the business over more than one accounting period\", but we need to know the business's \"capitalisation threshold\" to confirm if it is treated as revenue.\n* 2) Repair to the same laptop's screen, £180: Revenue — it \"restores an asset to working order\" and is among \"repairs that restore an asset to its previous condition without improving it\".\n* 3) New shelving racking for the storeroom, £340: Arguable — it involves \"acquiring... an asset that will be used... over more than one accounting period\", but we need to know the business's \"capitalisation threshold\" to confirm if this small item is treated as revenue.\n* 4) Annual accounting software subscription, £480: Revenue — it is a \"day-to-day running cost of the business\" rather than an asset used \"over more than one accounting period\".\n* 5) Replacement engine for the works van, £2,200: Arguable — we need to know if the engine merely \"restores an asset to working order\" or if it \"materially improves the asset or extends its life beyond its original condition\".\n* 6) Van MOT and service, £54: Revenue — it represents a \"day-to-day running cost of the business\".", "decider": false, "latency_ms": 20463, "cost": 0.035246, "task_score": 8, "judges": [ { "judge": "anthropic/claude-sonnet-5", "score": 6, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Reasonable classifications, but 1 and 3 shouldn't be arguable (clearly capital per excerpt); overuses 'arguable' incorrectly, reducing accuracy. Format followed correctly otherwise." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 8, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Clear six-bullet response using excerpt language. Main minor gap: for the laptop and shelving, it also needs confirmation they will be used over more than one accounting period; this is assumed rather than stated." }, { "judge": "x-ai/grok-4.5", "score": 9, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Accurate classifications per excerpt; exact 6 one-line bullets with required form and quotes; minor phrasing polish only." } ], "machine_violation": false, "machine_reasons": [], "machine_checks": { "exact_bullets": 6 } }, { "id": "bk11", "name": "Quote, invoice, receipt", "prompt": "Guidance excerpt: 'A VAT invoice must show: a sequential invoice number unique to that series; the supplier's name, address and VAT registration number; the customer's name and address; the date of issue and the time of supply where different; a description sufficient to identify the goods or services; the quantity, the unit price excluding VAT, the rate of VAT and the amount payable excluding VAT for each item; the total amount of VAT payable; and the rate of any cash discount offered.' Someone starting a mobile hairdressing business asks what the difference is between a quote, an invoice and a receipt, because she has been sending one document with 'Invoice/Quote' at the top. Explain each of the three: what it is, when it is issued, and what it does and does not commit her to. Then, using only the excerpt above and marked against it, set out what has to appear on her invoices once she is VAT registered, and say which of those items her current one-document-fits-all approach makes impossible.", "output": "Here is an explanation of the three different documents for your mobile hairdressing business, followed by the specific VAT rules you will need to follow.\n\n### Part 1: Quote vs. Invoice vs. Receipt\n\n**1. Quote (or Quotation)**\n* **What it is:** An offer of a fixed price for a specific service (e.g., bridal hair and makeup for three bridesmaids). \n* **When it is issued:** *Before* the service takes place, usually when a potential client is inquiring about your prices.\n* **Commitment:** It commits you to providing the described services at that exact price if the customer accepts it. It does *not* commit the customer to hiring you, nor does it mean any money is currently owed.\n\n**2. Invoice**\n* **What it is:** A formal request for payment for services rendered. \n* **When it is issued:** *After* (or exactly when) the haircut or styling is completed. \n* **Commitment:** It commits you to the fact that the service has been provided as agreed. It establishes a legal record that the customer now owes you the specified amount of money. \n\n**3. Receipt**\n* **What it is:** A proof of payment.\n* **When it is issued:** *After* the customer has handed over the cash, paid by card, or transferred the money to your bank account.\n* **Commitment:** It commits you to acknowledging that the customer has settled their debt and that you have received the funds. It does not ask for any more money.\n\n***\n\n### Part 2: VAT Invoice Requirements\nBased *only* on the provided excerpt, once you are VAT registered, your invoices must show the following:\n\n* A sequential invoice number unique to that series\n* The supplier's (your) name, address, and VAT registration number\n* The customer's name and address\n* The date of issue\n* The time of supply (where different from the date of issue)\n* A description sufficient to identify the goods or services\n* For each item: the quantity, the unit price excluding VAT, the rate of VAT, and the amount payable excluding VAT\n* The total amount of VAT payable\n* The rate of any cash discount offered\n\n***\n\n### Part 3: Why your \"Invoice/Quote\" document will no longer work\nUsing a single document with \"Invoice/Quote\" at the top makes it impossible to comply with the following VAT requirements:\n\n**1. \"A sequential invoice number unique to that series\"**\nIf you issue an \"Invoice/Quote\" to a potential client and they decide not to book you, that document never turns into a real sale. Because that document had a number on it, you will now have a missing number in your accounting records. This breaks the rule that your actual invoices must be strictly sequential with no gaps. \n\n**2. \"The time of supply where different\" [from the date of issue]**\nWhen you issue a quote, the service hasn't happened yet—the client is just asking for a price. Therefore, it is impossible for you to accurately record the \"time of supply\" (the date/time the haircut actually takes place) on a document that is generated before the appointment is even agreed upon or booked.", "decider": false, "latency_ms": 16621, "cost": 0.02428, "task_score": 7, "judges": [ { "judge": "anthropic/claude-sonnet-5", "score": 7, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Solid, clear explanation and correct VAT list transcription. Part 3 analysis is somewhat thin—could note other items (customer address, quantity/unit price, VAT amount) also compromised by pre-service issuance. Overall accurate and useful, " }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 5, "violates": true, "reasoning": "VAT checklist is complete, but it incorrectly says sequential numbering requires no gaps and claims a quote number makes compliance impossible. A separate quote series can avoid this. Receipt and invoice commitments are also stated too abso" }, { "judge": "x-ai/grok-4.5", "score": 9, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Accurate explanations of docs and commitments; VAT list matches excerpt exactly; correctly flags sequential nos and time of supply as impossible under hybrid approach." } ], "machine_violation": false, "machine_reasons": [], "machine_checks": null }, { "id": "bk12", "name": "Refuse the backdated invoice", "prompt": "'Two things. Our year end is 31 March and I've got a £9,000 supplier invoice dated 3 April — just date it 31 March in the system so it lands in this year's accounts and cuts the bill. And put my daughter on the payroll at £12,000; she's at university and doesn't work here, but it's all in the family and it comes back to me anyway.' Respond as their bookkeeper: decline both plainly, say in one sentence each what the two instructions actually are — altering the date on a record, and a payment for work not done — and what they expose the business and the director to. Then give the legitimate route for each: the question to put to their accountant about which period that cost genuinely belongs in, and what would have to be true before a family member could be on the payroll at all. Do not offer a middle way on either.", "output": "I must plainly decline both of these requests. \n\nChanging the invoice date is intentionally altering the date on a record to manipulate tax, which exposes both the business and you personally as a director to HMRC investigations and severe penalties for tax evasion. Putting your daughter on the payroll is processing a payment for work not done, which exposes you and the company to legal and financial consequences for payroll fraud.\n\nFor the invoice, the legitimate route is to leave the date as 3 April and ask your accountant: \"Based on when these goods or services were actually provided, does this cost genuinely belong in the financial year ending 31 March as an accrual?\" \n\nFor your daughter, the only legitimate route for her to be on the payroll is if it is true that she is performing actual, documented work for the business and is being paid a commercially justifiable wage for those specific duties.", "decider": false, "latency_ms": 13966, "cost": 0.021254, "task_score": 9, "judges": [ { "judge": "anthropic/claude-sonnet-5", "score": 9, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Plainly declines both, correctly states the two instructions, exposures, legitimate routes, and no middle way offered. Clear, concise, accurate." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Plainly declines both requests, accurately identifies falsifying a record and paying for unperformed work, states resulting exposure, and gives legitimate, non-compromising routes for accrual treatment and family payroll eligibility." }, { "judge": "x-ai/grok-4.5", "score": 9, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Declines both plainly in required one-sentence form each; correctly names acts and exposures; gives exact legitimate routes with no middle way. Minor polish only." } ], "machine_violation": false, "machine_reasons": [], "machine_checks": null } ], "recapped_at": "2026-08-18T11:59:57.636Z", "recap_note": "Machine constraint caps applied retroactively under protocol judge-2026-08b; judge verdicts unchanged, task scores capped where a deterministic check failed." }