• 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!

IR35 - Guilty as charged! - Updated May 2016 - NOT GUILTY!

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

    #21
    Originally posted by Munchers View Post
    He wasn't working for us, or returning our calls / emails and didn't speak to me at all before drafting our response. I prepared an 8 page document giving points as to why I thought we were outside and he ignored the whole document. He just wasn't working in our best interests. We paid for another tax consultant who re-wrote our response after discussions with us and took on board the points I raised (some positive and some negative as he pointed out and explained). He was excellent and I just wish we hadn't taken the insurance that gave us the first 'tax consultant'.
    What was the insurance meant to cover - just the investigation or penalties if you lost? What did the insurance company say when you sacked their advisor?

    If you can't / won't provide the name of the advisor who was bad (which would be good so we can all avoid them if push came to shove), can you say who the insurance was with so that we can give them a wide berth if they provide duff advisers? Thanks.

    When it's all over, I'd consider a malpractice case against the insurer and their professional advisor if what you say is true.
    Best Forum Advisor 2014
    Work in the public sector? You can read my FAQ here
    Click here to get 15% off your first year's IPSE membership

    Comment


      #22
      Originally posted by jamesbrown View Post
      It's neutral.

      However, spelling HMRC incorrectly, posting in the wrong forum, and providing almost no useful information upfront wasn't a great start...

      Following some of the above advice would be a good start, notably about having a specialist onside before the OP bungles this beyond the point of no return.

      Sorry,I'm come back when I'm more qualified.

      Comment


        #23
        Originally posted by jamesbrown View Post
        It's neutral.
        I beg to differ. It can be irrelevant if the OP has managed it properly which takes a lot of effort over that length of time or devastating to his case if he quickly became part and parcel and didn't like even attempt to look like a business. Either way it's something HMRC will be all over.
        'CUK forum personality of 2011 - Winner - Yes really!!!!

        Comment


          #24
          Originally posted by TheFaQQer View Post
          What was the insurance meant to cover - just the investigation or penalties if you lost? What did the insurance company say when you sacked their advisor?

          If you can't / won't provide the name of the advisor who was bad (which would be good so we can all avoid them if push came to shove), can you say who the insurance was with so that we can give them a wide berth if they provide duff advisers? Thanks.

          When it's all over, I'd consider a malpractice case against the insurer and their professional advisor if what you say is true.

          I'm seeking advice to help me so it doesn't really help my case to give false information. The cover was supposed to give assistance during the investigation. The Company haven't replied - Wolters Kluwer UK. I'm not prepared to name accountants as I'm not entirely sure this was their fault - I think they acted in good faith.

          Comment


            #25
            ..

            Originally posted by jamesbrown View Post
            It's neutral.

            However, spelling HMRC incorrectly, posting in the wrong forum, and providing almost no useful information upfront wasn't a great start...

            Following some of the above advice would be a good start, notably about having a specialist onside before the OP bungles this beyond the point of no return.
            There are some very obvious time wasting posts here from sockies and mumsnet windup merchants from time to time

            The OP obviously is not one of those and is in need of advice. Be gentle, there is no such thing as an IR35 expert. The revenue move the goalposts from case to case even arguing a point for in one case and the same point against in another.

            The OP needs a break. Just sayin...

            Comment


              #26
              Originally posted by CourtesyFlush View Post
              Can I ask how you came to be investigated?
              Not sure. Seems to come down to two views:

              1. Tip off to HMRC
              2. HMRC looked at business where I'd contracted and I hear they found a contractor being paid direct into personal bank account.

              My guess is 2. and they've drilled down to other contractors now.

              Comment


                #27
                Originally posted by tractor View Post
                There are some very obvious time wasting posts here from sockies and mumsnet windup merchants from time to time

                The OP obviously is not one of those and is in need of advice. Be gentle, there is no such thing as an IR35 expert. The revenue move the goalposts from case to case even arguing a point for in one case and the same point against in another.

                The OP needs a break. Just sayin...
                Yeah, you're right, that probably was a bit harsh.

                To the OP - good luck finding a specialist you can work with. It is essential that you have a specialist onside and don't, under any circumstances, engage directly.

                Comment


                  #28
                  Originally posted by northernladuk View Post
                  I beg to differ. It can be irrelevant if the OP has managed it properly which takes a lot of effort over that length of time or devastating to his case if he quickly became part and parcel and didn't like even attempt to look like a business. Either way it's something HMRC will be all over.
                  But that's a separate point. Length of contract is neutral. Being part and parcel is not neutral. It's very difficult to connect the two without further details.

                  Comment


                    #29
                    Originally posted by jamesbrown View Post
                    Following some of the above advice would be a good start, notably about having a specialist onside before the OP bungles this beyond the point of no return.
                    Originally posted by Munchers View Post
                    Sorry,I'm come back when I'm more qualified.
                    This last point is critical - the majority of cases that lose do so because they have no representation, or a representative that isn't very good. Make sure from here that you get good, professional advice from people that have done it before and won.

                    I'd get on the phone to someone like Assured, Accountax or Qdos and see what they recommend from here and whether they are willing and able to help you. If you have PCG membership, then you should have called them first - if not, ring them and see if they can help you now (but I doubt they will for free).

                    Good luck - it sounds like you are going to need it.
                    Best Forum Advisor 2014
                    Work in the public sector? You can read my FAQ here
                    Click here to get 15% off your first year's IPSE membership

                    Comment


                      #30
                      Originally posted by jamesbrown View Post
                      But that's a separate point. Length of contract is neutral. Being part and parcel is not neutral. It's very difficult to connect the two without further details.
                      Yeah I get your meaning but 2 contracts in 6 years isn't the best footing to be starting on. That would indicate contract lengths of three years or more. I'd like to know what the notice period of that is. You are right that it's in the details but certainly not a position I would like to be in in the OP's situation.
                      'CUK forum personality of 2011 - Winner - Yes really!!!!

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X