> There seems to be a LOT of confusion as to whether you can deduct expenses or not -many saying no, as it will count as a hobby.

Who are these "many"? I honestly can't see at all where there is a confusion. The government can't have the cake and eat it - if they class the breeder as a business, they cannot at the same time class them as a hobby.

> There seems to be a LOT of confusion as to whether you can deduct expenses or not -many saying no, as it will count as a hobby.

Surely they can't have their cake and eat it, it's not a profit unless you deduct expenses.

Definition of profit: noun

noun: profit; plural noun: profits

1.

a financial gain, especially the difference between the amount earned and the amount spent in buying, operating, or producing something.

The government can't have the cake and eat it - if they class the breeder as a business, they cannot at the same time class them as a hobby.

No, I meant if you are to be classed as a hobby breeder, not needing a license, you maybe cannot deduct for expenses. Which means you cannot sell more than a pup or two.

Just what's being discussed by dog people in general.

Surely they can't have their cake and eat it, it's not a profit unless you deduct expenses.


I heard it said that the £1000 limit was to allow for people with hobbies selling things (flowers, knitted baby clothes, whatever) to a certain extent, but that a HOBBY is always expected to cost you money, so therefore you cannot deduct expenses.

> No, I meant if you are to be classed as a hobby breeder, not needing a license, you maybe cannot deduct for expenses. Which means you cannot sell more than a pup or two.

It’s just that if you are classed as a hobby, and so not needing a licence, then you can sell your pups from one or two litters a year, expenses or not, and whether there is one pup in the litter or 12.

If however the question arises that maybe you are making lots of profit from these one or two litters per year, and there is a possibility that you are engaging in a business and so may need a license, then in order to calculate that profit your expenses will need to be taken into account.

We are just going to have to agree to disagree monkeyj.

I wrote, quite clearly, in my initial post that there may be times where rehoming is the best option where some girls would prefer to be in a single dog household, pack issues arise etc.

When you start 'moving on all your ex breeding stock', you are no longer indulging in a hobby - you are a business.

If you are continuing your lines, the adults are the 'advert' that most buyers wish to see. They are the 'finished product' that show a pup's potential. How many times have other forum users commented on not just looking at the sire and dam but further back to see potential - both positive and negative?

Finally, If you can't afford to feed the dogs you have, well, then you really shouldn't be breeding them.

You've made your point, I've made mine, let's leave it at that.

at end of day its down to the local council.they told my friend she cant breed any after end of september without a license if one litter unless she gives  pups away.
im applying for a license.just got my waste license as have to take all dog poop to tip if get a license and have got to put plastic cladding up in the dogs room on the walls half way up and im home breeding 3 litters to 4 a year.plus fire extinguishers and  smoke alarms.

> im applying for a license.just got my waste license as have to take all dog poop to tip if get a license and have got to put plastic cladding up in the dogs room on the walls half way up and im home breeding 3 litters to 4 a year.plus fire extinguishers and  smoke alarms.

See when people ask why Would we OBJECT TO LICENSING EVEN FOR ONE LITTER.

I don't drive, so how would I get waste to a tip, why would I have to turn my and the dogs home into a kennel when our breeding activities are a small part of our dog keeping, at most for 8 - 12 weeks of the year.

Also we could end up having to apply for change of use of our homes, and could well be turned down in our normal domestic residences.

After 8 generations of breeding having bred champions for myself and others and bred dogs that have produced well for others, including Top winner in my breed and group in last few years, I know am thinking I may just have to give up, and just buy in my next dog.  But who will breed it?  We are down to around 7 litters a year in my breed, and one of those would normally be mine?

If u had to apply for change of use of your home that brings with it all sorts of other problems
This looks like it could actually encourage the big breeders who are in it for money and push out the good hobby breeders exactly the opposite to what it was supposed to achieve ...protecting dogs welfare

> This looks like it could actually encourage the big breeders who are in it for money and push out the good hobby breeders exactly the opposite to what it was supposed to achieve ...protecting dogs welfare

I think the powers that be actually want the hobby element out of the picture, much easier to control and tax an industry with set parameters.

Like our breeds those of us who are breed enthusiast/custodians, we are all very different with different needs and no one size fits all standardised system will happily fit us.  It is one reason so many of us came out of the KC Assured Breeder scheme when they went for UKAS accreditation.

There are definitely obvious things that are should nots in breeding, but is no one best way for every breed, breeder bitch or individual litter.

gsdowner, you wrote quite clearly that "selling on/rehoming all ex breeding stock at a price just screams that you are in it for the money and simply making more room".

It is to this statement I replied commenting that it is wrong. And I explained why. By all means, continue to disagree.


And I would like to clarify regarding your:

> Finally, If you can't afford to feed the dogs you have, well, then you really shouldn't be breeding them.

I can afford to feed the dogs I have. And if you look at some of the threads discussing which food is the best, raw vs kibble and so on, you will see people regularly commenting that while they would have loved to feed better/more expensive food, unfortunately they have a "pack" and therefore have to consider the cost. As well as time, as its much quicker to poor some kibble in as opposed to creating a meal from wholesome and varied ingredients for each individual dog.

To further clarify, the quality of food is only one consideration among many others which demonstrate why having one or two dogs in the family, instead of 5, 6 or 20, is almost always results in a much better life for the dog. And this is the reason, and the only reason, why I and many serious breeders both in UK and abroad find loving homes for our adults once they retire from breeding and show.

> This looks like it could actually encourage the big breeders who are in it for money and push out the good hobby breeders exactly the opposite to what it was supposed to achieve ...protecting dogs welfare.

I think at the moment its not too bad, they do allow for hobby breeders. It's worrying and stressful reading and trying to understand the new law and rules etc, but if you look at it - I can't think of many hobby breeders who breed more than 2 litters per year, and I can't think of any who could even entertain an idea of earning a "profit" from it.

So we are safe, I think, for now at least.

I hope u are right monkeyj.having always  bought my dogs from good hobby breeders i would hate to think that may become very hard

the council also decide how many dogs you are allowed in your house and that includes pet dogs.ive got 6 and have to leash walk 3 times per day as only have small garden.plus ive got to stop my fostering and looking after my mums dog as he stays alot.also when i apply for my license they may say i have to cut down.its very hard.

the council also decide how many dogs you are allowed in your house

Are you in council property? if so it might be of interest that Westminster city council will not allow dogs in any of it's council properties >& they enforce it<
.

no im not in a council property.

no i do not live in a council property i own my own proprty but the council can still tell you how many you are allowed on the license if too many you have to cut down or not breed.

Surely they can't have their cake and eat it, it's not a profit unless you deduct expenses.

I think they are going to, I have been reading this thread and trying to make sense of what on earth is going on, the new legislation says you need a license if you breed 3 or more litters or are breeding dogs as a business. I have looked at the HMRC site about the hobby allowance of £1000, this is for GROSS income - so you can have up to £1000 income before you need to register for tax but this is before you make any allowance for expenditure.

With most pedigree dogs this £1000 will easily be passed with just a couple of puppies.

The two things are separate - you won't necessarily pay tax if you are breeding dogs - IF - you are not using all of your personal tax allowance, you will have to fill in a tax return though.

However if my understanding is right - by the very fact that you are now considered a business for tax purposes you will need a license even if you are only breeding one litter as you will be breeding dogs as a business.

I have felt sick trying to make sense of this and have been hoping against hope that I was wrong in my understanding - not just because I will now stop breeding as I am not willing to turn my home into a kennel - My dogs are always pets first and foremost and any puppies I raise are raised with no expense or energy spared, just like all the breeders here who are doing their best.

It feels like now puppies are going to be raised like livestock by big commercial breeders - quite the opposite to what it should have achieved. in my many searches for information I accidentally landed on a site and it turned out to be for a breeding kennels - they had a license for 200 breeding bitches - I could not get off the site quickly enough - it felt like I had touched something dirty.

I hope I am wrong for all the good breeders who do it for the love of their animals.

Hen

This really doesn't make sense. There have to be amendments to follow. What about all the back-street and 'accidentally' bred pet litters? Who would track down the guy selling a litter in the pub - and then try to make him conform to the rules? Would this mean that those people who don't register their stock would remain below the radar, and be able to carry on as they do at present? I fear for the future of British bred dogs if so.
Sorry about all the question marks.

all i can say is spk to your council in october.im going for my license and i homebreed.

My friend is a dog walker, daycare, home boarder and can confirm the council haven't a clue what they are going to do here, as at present she only needs a licence for the Home boarding..

If it's the same as other areas of council  rules different councils interpret different and can be different to hmrc and there rules on who is  business and taxation
I guess the guy in the pub and the my dog needs to have a litter types  etc will carry on as they always have .unless someone reports an individual  it won't change anything for those people.

I don't breed, so this legislation is not going to affect me, but I am concerned for our hobby breeder/exhibitors, and the future for our sport. All this reads as if everyone who is known to breed a litter is going to be placed under pressure to comply with rules more appropriate to a professional establishment, and this is certain to hit the minority breeds owners the hardest.
On an more optimistic note, in the 70's there was also an attempt to legislate, (The Breeding of Dogs Act, 1973). An owner was required to have a council licence if they had more than two bitches of breeding age. There was a similar degree of alarm, and my Canine Society held an open meeting with a local council representative to hear how the Act would be  implemented. His advice seemed to be not to worry, and in the event, I actually know very few people who were actually issued with a licence.
Though I only bred one, or occasionally two, litters a year, I did have four toydog bitches of breeding age, so I approached my own local public health inspector, (different council), - who actually lived just around the corner. He said that the Act was not aimed at people like myself. He owned three Afghan bitches which he occasionally showed, but did not breed from, and said that if I needed a licence, so did he. He knew his patch, and exactly which breeders needed to be regulated - and that was the way that he intended to apply the Act. As he would have been the person to instigate any action, he assured me that I was in no danger of being prosecuted. I really hope that common sense will prevail.

> I really hope that common sense will prevail.

I really hope so too, but so often the people at the council are not dog people.

if you show and earn a commision or wage you need a license aswell.comes under exhibiting animals part .

Hen - this is my concern.  I have had one litter 5 years ago and am thinking of having one more.  Why would I go through all that and pay £300 for a licence for one litter of healthy, award winning working dogs? :(

Came across this US article and the quoted part really hit the nail on the head re this discussion: https://talkdoglogic.wordpress.com/2017/03/23/part-3-puppy-producers-role-in-the-shelter-problem/

".........One of the reasons I don’t like the term “backyard breeder” is that many people think that any one who has a backyard and produces puppies is a “backyard breeder” including passionate, educated hobby breeders who are the backbone of responsible breeders. The term “backyard breeder” gets a lot of harmful legislation passed.

When terms like “backyard breeder” and “puppy mill” are used hand in hand, it is easy for both the public and politicians to think of anyone who breeds a dog at home as being irresponsible. So legislation gets passed banning people from breeding dogs in their home. They claim that the only way to know if a breeder is responsible or not is if their facilities are held to certain requirements are subject to regular inspections. The problem with this is a) as we saw above, USDA Certified and Inspected does not guarantee the animals are in great conditions and b) most  responsible breeders do not have “facilities”. Their dogs are part of their family and the whelping box is in their living room. They may have one or two litters a year, and they hand raise those dogs with intent and love. They don’t have the funds or the inclination to have a huge heated kennel with runs and exercise areas. They may only own a total of three or four dogs. So a lot of well meaning legislation ends up banning the people who do the most good for the dogs and rewarding the high volume commercial producers........"

>

The license is going to be more than £300, I spoke to the licensing inspector for Bristol, he told me currently its £274 + vat and £100 for vet inspection, then you have to have liability insurance, but from 1st October the license will cost 'considerably' more and so will the vets visits due to increased paper work.

Bristol has 2 inspectors to cover the whole of Bristol, even if we applied now to be licensed I can't see us being inspected any time soon.  I also probably wouldn't get a license as we need to have an isolation area away from our other dogs that is completely waterproof, that floors ceilings and walls can be pressure washed, my dogs all live in my house.  I'm also not happy that they will also insist on year vaccinations (some will accept titre) but Lepto has to be done annually - my dogs will never get L4, so after 18 years of breeding, all my dogs health tested clear, it looks like I may now give up.  The rules are beyond workable, if we have to do the amount of paperwork required we won't have time to care for our pups.

Do you know if they are going to go hard line, wanting even one pup sold to count for licencing, or as now only going for those breeding over the 2 (currently 4) litters?

It's everyone selling pups, he said you can have 1 or 2 litters without a license providing you either give them away or over a 12 month period don't make more than £1k, they should have just said everyone will need a license.

Also if you're licensed and NOT an AB with the Kennel Club you can no longer advertise pups on their puppy sales register

I wonder how they wouldd.deal with the financial aspect if a donation was given rather than payment much like rescues do when u adopt a dog ?

Also if you're licensed and NOT an AB with the Kennel Club you can no longer advertise pups on their puppy sales register

This is quite shocking really Sharon - How is it meant to help?
other than ensuring that the disreputable breeders who breed any dog to any bitch, continue as they always have - they don't want to be involved with the KC. But  those who are home breeders - who raise puppies in the environment they are going to spend their lives - a house, these people will stop breeding. The KC club is effectively branding every one with a license but not an AB as a puppy farmer - how insulting. And worse still if you don't want to have a license at all!!

I think puppies are not meant to spend their formative weeks in a sole-less kennel, they are domesticated and need constant social interaction with humans to get them ready for their most important role, as some ones beloved pet, we can show them and trial them etc etc (that is the ways we share our lives with them) but in the end most puppies are pets and live closely with us. This new law will just ensure that people who are doing it for money either the ones who don't care and just breed anything or the big commercial kennels who take on the licensing rules because it is a business to them. The people who do with for love will not continue because they are not willing to turn their homes upside down.

Finally I think sadly the councils will of course jump on it and interpret it in the strictest possible way - they are cash strapped and this is a source of revenue to them, why would they do anything else.

Hen

I am in the same position. I breed 2 or occasionally 3 litters per year and the dogs do not make a profit. We have a history of awful vaccine reactions, so I do minimal vaccinations. I keep all my oldies, as they are my family and I love them all. My oldest is 14.5. After 33 years of careful and conscientious breeding, with potential owners waiting up to a year for a puppy, this may be the end of it. It is heart breaking for us caring breeders.

I had my Champdogs renewal through today and won't be renewing, if we can't advertise if we're not licensed then I think a lot will decline now too.

This year one litter of 3 pups and a c-section, but because my income was more than £1k I have to be licensed, so after 18 years of getting all my dogs DNA tested and clear, and now testing for AON looks like this is the end for me too.

Think it's the KC that won't let you advertise on their site not this one

But you will still need your breeders license to advertise on here

So everyone who advertises puppies on here has to have a licence from the council & you cannot advertise litter without one. Wow there will be 100s more licensed Breeders. Even for one off litters Glad I don't breed dogs. Smallholding licensing is bad enough

With Bristol it's taking an average of 5 months before inspectors can come out to check you over, so what happens to us that had planned on litters soon?

>So everyone who advertises puppies on here has to have a licence from the council & you cannot advertise litter without one. Wow there will be 100s more licensed Breeders. Even for one off litters Glad I don't breed dogs. Smallholding licensing is bad enough

Yes because if you're advertising you have a litter for sale, then you need a license,

Yes something needed to be done about puppy farms, cross breeders who sale at extortionate prices etc. but think this is hitting hardest the small time hobby breeders who do everything right

It's looking very sad if more and more hobby breeders the exact ones I prefer to have a puppy from are stopping breeding . With the extra costs of licenses and the costs of preparing your house the next will be increases in cost of pups. Not because anyone is being greedy but because costs have to be covered somehow .

This is worrying more and more as I read this thread.
As furriefriends said, hobby breeders are the ones I have bought my dogs from, I don’t go anywhere else. I want puppies from health and temperament tested parents, not some random mating, I want thought put into those puppies, not something just to make money.
Luckily cost isn’t the main problem for me, and I’m pretty sure those hobby breeders that do continue will have to raise the prices, they can’t do it for free, no one can.
I’m finding it deeply frustrating that those who have the welfare and love for their dogs are the ones being penalised the most whereas the bybs will skip under the radar and continue to breed poorly produced puppies at silly prices

Will this end up like the dog licence of old? Less and less  bothered so it just became a nothing?
I’d hate for these knowledgeable hobby breeders who put their life and sole into raising litters and preserving bloodlines end up giving up.
I would want any pup I bought to be bred by these people rather than the big commercial folk.

The implications of this legislation do seem to have been sprung onto everyone so late in the day, leaving them with little time to organise themselves. The KC could have provided some leadership here, but their take seems to have been to see whether the ABS inspection and subsequent membership would meet DEFRA requirements. (Please correct me if I have mis-interpreted this). If ABS inspection is eventually judged sufficient to meet the required standard, maybe this will have to be the way forward for hobby breeders, whatever reservations they may have about the scheme.
In the meantime it is another political muddle, with many small breeders knowing even less than has been published on this site. There can be no doubt, this is an area that needed regulation, we must all know of breeders who keep dogs in conditions which are less than ideal, but I do hope that it isn't going to demoralise the breeder who shares their home with their breed, and takes pleasure in being seen out promoting it at shows.

After much reading of the proposed legislation and comments on forums I conclude that in the future we will see the majority of puppies born and sold from commercial premises, albeit with supposedly higher welfare standards such as cleaning play items every time they are used and walking dogs every day, I could tear my hair out when I read that "higher (in red) standards" mean 2 meals a day instead of 1 and 4 litters from a bitch instead of 6 (yes, it's there in black and white).

Several of my long time breeder friends are on the brink of deciding that they will give up their decades of careful breeding partly because they will not agree to blanket vaccinations and if they make no profit why on earth should anyone show or breed, this legislation seems to be aimed at putting all breeders except commercial out of breeding and not entirely to do with welfare concerns as it claims to be.  The KC could see its end in sight as registrations plummet and pedigree dogs become a rarity, an almighty sledgehammer is about to fall on us all and who knows where the fallout will hit hardest.  Gloom and dispondency, or a brave new world!

>I breed 2 or occasionally 3 litters per year and the dogs do not make a profit. We have a history of awful vaccine reactions, so I do minimal vaccinations. I keep all my oldies, as they are my family and I love them all. My oldest is 14.5. After 33 years of careful and conscientious breeding, with potential owners waiting up to a year for a puppy, this may be the end of it.

I breed 1, very occasionally 2 litters per year, and some years in between I don't breed. I also re-home most of my adult dogs to loving pet homes, once they retire from show and breeding.

According to the Regulations, breeding "with a view to making a profit" is one possible indication of a business, and if the council asks me a question "why do you breed?" my answer would be, with a view to keeping a puppy from the litter. I would explain that to me, the point of breeding is to produce a puppy that is an improvement on its parents, raise that puppy and train it, show it to confirm its qualities, and if all is well breed from that puppy when it reaches maturity to produce another puppy that is a further improvement, raise it and train it and so on. It's about "perfection of creation".

Because I breed to keep a puppy, I cannot possibly breed more than 1, very occasionally 2 litters per year, as raising and training the puppy takes significant time and effort which means I can only keep 1-2 puppies at any one time. Because I breed to keep a puppy, I cannot possibly breed every year, as once grown, showing the puppy takes significant time and effort and often means I cannot be in two places at once. Because I breed to keep a puppy, I cannot possibly keep all my adult dogs who retire from breeding and show, as raising, training, showing the puppy as well as caring for it alongside my other dogs, giving them all plenty of attention, taking them for regular walks and hikes in beautiful places, treating them as part of the family, takes significant time and effort and (to me) necessitates a maximum of 4 dogs in total.

Add to this thousands and thousands spent on regular travel to and participation in shows both home and abroad, on importing semen from across the world to mate my bitch to what I think is the best dog, membership and participation in relevant breed clubs.... I don't have a magic ball but I'm pretty certain my activity of breeding won't be considered anything but a hobby, at least under the present laws.

Sorry monkeyj but that won't wash, the Council will not be asking you why you breed but are you selling the remainder of the litter and how much money are you making, it might be possible if you only have one or two puppies in a litter or if you are generous enough to give the rest away.

> Sorry monkeyj but that won't wash, the Council will not be asking you why you breed

I'm pretty sure it will, given that this question is flagged as highly relevant in the law....

but I'm safe whichever, in my breed the litters are small and sold for next to nothing.

>I have looked at the HMRC site about the hobby allowance of £1000, this is for GROSS income - so you can have up to £1000 income before you need to register for tax but this is before you make any allowance for expenditure.

Having a trading income of over £1000 does not automatically mean that the person is engaging in business. I can't find anywhere where it says otherwise....

Instead, I found this HMRC guidance on business test: https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/vat-business-non-business/vbnb22000

and their nine badges of trade: https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/business-income-manual/bim20205

What about how u advertise u have a litter ? Doesn't that require u to have a licence regardless of.the other criteria ? Maybe some won't need to advertise pups as could.be word of mouth i suppose
Some of.the problem maybe how councils interpret the law. I've heard of at least one that is insisting  £1000 line is money received    In that case HMRC rules wouldn't apply the two can be separate

> The KC could see its end in sight as registrations plummet and pedigree dogs become a rarity, an almighty sledgehammer is about to fall on us all and who knows where the fallout will hit hardest.&nbsp; Gloom and dispondency, or a brave new world!

Not only show dogs, but working lines gundogs (some of course are kennel bred, but some are house-bred), working collies/sheepdogs of various breeds will be affected.

I suppose it's even possible that some of the rarer breeds will be lost as a result of this, and for many breeds the gene pool will be restricted as I don't expect the commercial breeders will keep more than the minimum of males (would it be cynical to suggest many would be poodles?).