Another defeat for HMRC - £140k TalkSPORT host Another defeat for HMRC - £140k TalkSPORT host - Page 2
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Posts 11 to 15 of 15
  1. #11

    Super poster

    Lance's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    home
    Posts
    4,141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JohntheBike View Post
    well, as the poster asked, why would HMRC only challenge him for a selected period from his history of engagements and that outside the period for lodging an ET claim? If they had challenged him on his current period, then clearly that might have opened up the possibility that he would have claimed employment benefits.

    The message I will continually post is that HMG oppression can only be countered in the courts, no amount of debate or lobbying will change the oppression. Using the ET, which is outside the influence of HMRC, unless they are the client, is a very good way in my opinion of attacking IR35.

    The Matthew Taylor report recommended that tax and employment status determinations should be standardised, but HMG rejected this. So this can only be achieved by using the courts to establish this principle.
    how so?
    If that is the best attack then everyone becomes employed.
    Using ET is an attack on the clients. I grabnt you that if clients start to fear tribunals from contractors they'll step up their understanding of IR35. This will result in the majority of bum on seat contractors becoing FTCs. And the rarer skilled senior contractors will be able to drive the position outside.
    Either way it won't bother HMRC one way or the other.

    After April this may well all become academic though.
    See You Next Tuesday

  2. #12

    More fingers than teeth

    BlasterBates's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    1922 Commitee
    Posts
    14,059

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JohntheBike View Post
    yes, we know this, but there is provision to appeal this given a valid reason.
    Do you have an example where someone caught inside IR35 claimed employment benefits ?

    I can't imagine being caught inside IR35 would be an adequate reason for bringing a case after 3 months because a court would argue the plaintiff should have known.
    Last edited by BlasterBates; 11th July 2019 at 10:24.
    I'm alright Jack

  3. #13

    Super poster


    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    2,448

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JohntheBike View Post
    could it be that they were worried that he'd make a claim in the ET for employment benefits?
    Why would they care if he did?

  4. #14

    Fingers like lightning


    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    976

    Default

    Tax and employment laws are entirely separately beasts. Incorrectly, some might argue. A future Labour government trying to tackle forced self employment in generally low paid jobs might change this and drag contractors along but that is highly speculative.

    Non the less employment benefits will enter the equation for contractors considering what to do post April next year.

  5. #15

    Should post faster

    FIERCE TANK BATTLE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    133

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlasterBates View Post
    Do you have an example where someone caught inside IR35 claimed employment benefits ?

    I can't imagine being caught inside IR35 would be an adequate reason for bringing a case after 3 months because a court would argue the plaintiff should have known.
    Didn't that happen with HMRC's own contractor? IIRC HMRC said you're inside IR35, pay up, and they said OK give me my holiday entitlement, and HMRC said no, and they went to court and HMRC lost.

    Something like that.

    Edit: IPSE: Meet the woman who took on HMRC, and won

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •