Originally posted by BABABlackSheep
View Post
1. If the client says 'No contractors because we don't want to mess with determinations,' they could go the all-permie route or the all-brolly route. Either would allow them to make no determination.
2. Yes, I think it helps you if they do that. It means there will not be a list of inside determinations handed to HMRC, and therefore the risk of an inside determination throwing your historical contract inside is lessened. Or, perhaps it would be better to say, I think it lessens the risk of HMRC singling you out for historical investigation. No one knows how much they will be doing those historical investigations, of course.
3. Yes, if you become a brolly employee, you can MVL your company, and have legitimate reason to do so.
4. If you start another Ltd within 2 years, I'd say you are likely still at risk. It's not ironclad, your accountant is correct that intent to gain a tax advantage is part of the law. They will say you have to prove there was not such intent. The fact that you voluntarily have taken an employee position that was offered to you (a brolly one, but still employee) rather than looking for another non-employee role does not prove an absence of tax motivation. I think there would be a significant risk you would lose that case, but it is not iron-clad, you might win. The size of your ER claim and the length of time might matter. If your warchest is less than £50K and you start up your new thing after 21 months, you might be in good shape -- it would be hard to argue that you were just having it on for tax. If your warchest is £250K and you start up after 9 months I'd probably rule against you myself, it's a pretty obvious tax dodge.
Comment