Does anyone else feel like they are being financially ripped by the tax-man

[tinopener]

Smell. Sort your spelling out laddie.

Who rattled your cage? You sitting around all drinking cheap cider trying not to contract Coronavirus.

My Corona.

[LondonManc]

Who rattled your cage? You sitting around all drinking cheap cider trying not to contract Coronavirus.

My Corona.

The cider I drink is certainly not cheap. I get to WFH and enjoy the commute greatly.

[tinopener]

The cider I drink is certainly not cheap. I get to WFH and enjoy the commute greatly.

We all get to WFH cowboy. At least in these desperate times.

If you can gauge cheap and expensive ciders, well I feel sorry for you.

[WordIsBond]

Two of our main posters, jamesbrown and WordisBond, are usually calm and composed have started cracking at the seams and don't post on some threads which speaks volumes. They just know to carry on scrolling.

Who sez I'm cracking at the seams, you plonker! JB, now, he's always been half nuts.

And maybe I don't post on some threads because I'm lazy.

[webberg]

Ok. Stupid inside-IR35 contractor has a fee of 400 / day, £2K a week, 46 weeks, makes 92K even though he doesn't get employment rights. Equivalent employee makes £92K.

1250 tax code.

Employee pays £24,300 Income Tax and £5804 EE NI. Take home £61,896.

Inside IR35 contractor, according to this if it is correct, pays £24,200 Income Tax, £5521 EE NI, and £9552 ER NI, for a take home of £51,853. This is your error. Em'er NIC is for the engager. Yes I absolutely agree that they are trying to make contractors eat it but there are tax rules that say it's theirs. The reality here is that they are offering the job for £400/day less £9552/number of days. So the day rate is reduced to £359 and that is not an equivalent employee.

The inside contractor is marginally worse off even if the client pays the ER NI (and many don't, they were just going to keep paying the same rate to the agency and have the agency deduct the NI). Agreed but that is not a tax effect, that's a commercial effect.

Thanks for this. I understand where you are now.

[mockedguy]

I work for HMRC. This is my job.

You do realise it is a criminal offence to present yourself as working for the HMRC when you do not?

"Adrian Farley, HMRC Assistant Director of Criminal Investigation, said:

Impersonating an HMRC officer is a serious criminal offence and we will take action against anyone found committing this crime."

Fake ‘Customs Officers’ jailed - GOV.UK

[BrilloPad]

HMRC can and do read these forums. Anyone that reminds people of this is doing CUK a huge service.

[northernladuk]

You do realise it is a criminal offence to present yourself as working for the HMRC when you do not?

"Adrian Farley, HMRC Assistant Director of Criminal Investigation, said:

Impersonating an HMRC officer is a serious criminal offence and we will take action against anyone found committing this crime."

Fake ‘Customs Officers’ jailed - GOV.UK

But they didn't really work for HMRC so not an issue.

[northernladuk]

Who sez I'm cracking at the seams, you plonker! JB, now, he's always been half nuts.

And maybe I don't post on some threads because I'm lazy.

Shhh. Don't let the truth of the matter get in the way of making a good point.

Anyway, you've used and exclamation mark in this and a few other posts. That's as close to you getting mad as ive ever seen.

[mockedguy]

Well if he's got nothing else right the OP's user name is spot on.

'Mock' is a technical term used in software development. You must understand nothing about software design, development, testing, devops, etc and are judging that there is no difference between 'contractors' and 'employees'. There is a MASSIVE difference in the skill set and services contractors supply and permies in some professions. Thats why I asked you in another thread what you do to try and understand why you think there is no difference, which you just dodged answering and said you work for HMRC.