• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

HMRC Double Standards

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #11
    Originally posted by flamel View Post
    Shame on you - David Gauke says that is "morally wrong".
    How my decorator conducts his tax affairs are none of my concern, I'm not his keeper

    BTW Love Jimmy Carr's response via Twitter to hamface's predicament:

    'I'm going to keep it classy. It would be ‘morally wrong’ and ‘hypocrytical’ to comment on another individual’s tax affairs.

    — Jimmy Carr (@jimmycarr) April 8, 2016'

    Comment


      #12
      Originally posted by SlipTheJab View Post
      How my decorator conducts his tax affairs are none of my concern, I'm not his keeper
      The problem is that when the rules on IR35 change next April (and assuming they mirror closely those seen for public sector bodies), the onus is very much upon YOU to ensure that your decorator is complying with ALL of his tax obligations.

      If he is working under your supervision, direction and control then he is effectively to be taxed as those he is your employee. If he does not tax himself in that way, YOU may become liable.
      Best Forum Adviser & Forum Personality of the Year 2018.

      (No, me neither).

      Comment


        #13
        Originally posted by webberg View Post
        The problem is that when the rules on IR35 change next April (and assuming they mirror closely those seen for public sector bodies), the onus is very much upon YOU to ensure that your decorator is complying with ALL of his tax obligations.

        If he is working under your supervision, direction and control then he is effectively to be taxed as those he is your employee. If he does not tax himself in that way, YOU may become liable.
        And as your employee, you will be required to provide a pension, and the paperwork needs to be done in Romanian or Polish.
        Join Big Group - don't let them get away with it
        http://www.wttbiggroup.co.uk/

        Comment


          #14
          Originally posted by webberg View Post
          The problem is that when the rules on IR35 change next April (and assuming they mirror closely those seen for public sector bodies), the onus is very much upon YOU to ensure that your decorator is complying with ALL of his tax obligations.

          If he is working under your supervision, direction and control then he is effectively to be taxed as those he is your employee. If he does not tax himself in that way, YOU may become liable.
          The UK is coming into line with Germany on IR35 and I suspect that similar guidelines will exist for the decorator to be considered your employee he would be working for you on a regular basis, i.e. getting a few rooms painted wouldn't count.

          However you are responsible for the cleaner as they usually come in on a regular basis. If you used the decorator once a month yes that's a potential problem.
          I'm alright Jack

          Comment


            #15
            Originally posted by flamel View Post
            And as your employee, you will be required to provide a pension, and the paperwork needs to be done in Romanian or Polish.
            And not forgetting his new crime of aiding tax evasion ...

            Comment


              #16
              Regardless of the final outcome and what has to be paid or not as part of this contractor tax issue; It's important all culpability is addressed and acknowledged and there is some reckoning/accountability for it - given the effect its is having on a large group of people. The best route I can suggest for this is a Public Enquiry or Royal Commisssion into Contractor Tax Policy and Legislation and its enforcement/administration and management going back to 2000 to address the:

              activities of marketers/promoters of schemes particularly those associated with professional bodies and the factors driving these schemes and any allied issues of mis-selling and omitted regulation.

              AND

              The activities of HMRC itself and its officers for (i) the IR35 situation and (ii) inaction on any schemes for years and years.

              (amongst other things)

              It's clear to me that IR35 is effectively unenforceable (and this frankly became clear around 2002 )and statistically a chance worth taking.
              These pan industry mekon-brained blue sky characters doing 3 to five month rainmaker stints from location to location working on special projects and exempt from IR35 represent a very small part of the actual "contractor" workforce. My own experience of having run teams of contractors (and having been one) on a number of Financial Services Projects over 20 years are they mostly de facto permanent employees staying around often for years and years under full direction and control or whatever the grounds for distinction are.

              This is why the law is being changed (and the div tax went up) and will no doubt be extended beyond the Public Sector in due course.

              It may be this is an avenue one or more of the various collectives we are banded into look into.

              Comment


                #17
                Originally posted by QCApproved View Post
                My own experience of having run teams of contractors (and having been one) on a number of Financial Services Projects over 20 years are they mostly de facto permanent employees staying around often for years and years under full direction and control or whatever the grounds for distinction are.
                That was my experience too working for large Telcos but, unsurprisingly, you don't get many on public forums like CUK admitting to this.

                Comment


                  #18
                  Originally posted by QCApproved View Post
                  Regardless of the final outcome and what has to be paid or not as part of this contractor tax issue; It's important all culpability is addressed and acknowledged and there is some reckoning/accountability for it - given the effect its is having on a large group of people. The best route I can suggest for this is a Public Enquiry or Royal Commisssion into Contractor Tax Policy and Legislation and its enforcement/administration and management going back to 2000 to address the:

                  activities of marketers/promoters of schemes particularly those associated with professional bodies and the factors driving these schemes and any allied issues of mis-selling and omitted regulation.

                  AND

                  The activities of HMRC itself and its officers for (i) the IR35 situation and (ii) inaction on any schemes for years and years.

                  (amongst other things)

                  It's clear to me that IR35 is effectively unenforceable (and this frankly became clear around 2002 )and statistically a chance worth taking.
                  These pan industry mekon-brained blue sky characters doing 3 to five month rainmaker stints from location to location working on special projects and exempt from IR35 represent a very small part of the actual "contractor" workforce. My own experience of having run teams of contractors (and having been one) on a number of Financial Services Projects over 20 years are they mostly de facto permanent employees staying around often for years and years under full direction and control or whatever the grounds for distinction are.

                  This is why the law is being changed (and the div tax went up) and will no doubt be extended beyond the Public Sector in due course.

                  It may be this is an avenue one or more of the various collectives we are banded into look into.
                  Yes exactly, this is my opinion most contractors are temporary employees and there are a small number running a real business. The change of law to stop this is a matter of time and has already been done in other countries such as the Netherlands, Germany and Switzerland where there are contractors, but without much exception they are real contractors working as specialists for a few months. Companies have switched to payrolling or outsourcing companies.
                  I'm alright Jack

                  Comment


                    #19
                    Originally posted by QCApproved View Post

                    It may be this is an avenue one or more of the various collectives we are banded into look into.
                    I've raised this question many times and whilst I've been told that my assumption - "if contractors are taxed as employees, their costs increase and therefore either their daily rate goes up or the client gets a lower quality of work" - is incorrect, nobody can answer the following questions.

                    1. Why are the clients not pitching in to lobbying the Government about the damage that reducing the flexible workforce will do?

                    2. If there are people prepared to take a lower rate for the job, who are likely to be de facto employees, will more experienced contractors either leave, accept a lower figure or go permie?

                    Either way, there is going to be less cash for people to spend (and more in HMT) so the economy will suffer as the only policy Osbourne has is to spend our way out of trouble.
                    Best Forum Adviser & Forum Personality of the Year 2018.

                    (No, me neither).

                    Comment


                      #20
                      1. Why are the clients not pitching in to lobbying the Government about the damage that reducing the flexible workforce will do?

                      I have no idea they should be all over it in every industry. I'm considering raising it with the banking trade bodies. Things are still very subdued in the FS sector at least and given the effect of offshoring there is more thought given to hiring contractors than when tall this originated in 2000. However should things pick up it will be a significant cost because there will be the need once again. Quite frankly the energy and attention the regulators demand consume all before them. They represent the biggest risks and costs - this is an irritation currently.

                      2. If there are people prepared to take a lower rate for the job, who are likely to be de facto employees, will more experienced contractors either leave, accept a lower figure or go permie?

                      This is a more difficult one - there are always hot areas everywhere. People in compliance and reg and allied IT areas will get what they ask for. The weaker will take the hit or go permanent but there are multiple other factors at play for any such decision.
                      When you are looking at fines in the hundreds of millions £200 notes on a day rate x 20 is neither here nor there. in some institutions they have regulators on site filing progress reports as to whether xxx million should reign down from its suspended status APN style.
                      However, in general, the Stronger the sectors and economy someone is going to have to start bearing increased day rates.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X