• 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!

Advertising

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

    #21
    Originally posted by Jay12 View Post
    -Accountants: DNS Accountants

    -Theyve stated betwen 70 - 90% return on gross

    -You can keep the bridge

    Whats a reasonable % to expect?

    Appreciate the replies all, thanks.
    In terms of 70-90% the question of a reasonable amount to keep is looking at it exactly the wrong way. What is the basis of of the mechanism that yields that retention. It is possible it is above board but may well not be.

    Comment


      #22
      Originally posted by ASB View Post
      In terms of 70-90% the question of a reasonable amount to keep is looking at it exactly the wrong way. What is the basis of of the mechanism that yields that retention. It is possible it is above board but it’s 100% probable may well not be.
      FTFY - the only way to hit anything above 80% would be to use a pension
      merely at clientco for the entertainment

      Comment


        #23
        Originally posted by eek View Post
        FTFY - the only way to hit anything above 80% would be to use a pension
        Wrong. But in reality probably quite correct with your underlying but undeclared assumptions.

        The amounts billed are critical. Sure at "normal it contract" rates I would entirely agree. But that is of course merely a subset of the market.

        If your rate is low it is entirely possible to retain a higher percentage. In simplistic terms retaining almost 100% of 10k would be normal.(I do know a few people on these sorts of numbers railroaded into company operation).

        Given the OP has given no indications of the numbers you can not legitimately ascribe certainty to the undeclared arrangements being dodgy. Just likely.
        Last edited by ASB; 7 November 2017, 00:56.

        Comment


          #24
          Originally posted by Maslins View Post
          Many will do it on the basis "my accountant says it's ok, so it must be". When it comes to accounting/tax things, that mantra should be ok...but some accountants (and I use that term loosely) clearly don't give a poop about the law/ethics, bringing a bad name to the whole profession

          Hence my view, if you're in no doubt they are recommending what you're suggesting they're recommending, don't just leave, report these cowboys.
          Report to who? Are they a member of UK professional body? HMRC tell you that the responsibility for correct tax payment is the individual's responsibility. The accountants claim IPSE affiliation. Report them to IPSE? What will IPSE do? If you use this advertising scheme as suggested by the IPSE affiliate, will IPSE defend you when Hector calls? I wonder...........
          Public Service Posting by the BBC - Bloggs Bulls**t Corp.
          Officially CUK certified - Thick as f**k.

          Comment


            #25
            Originally posted by Fred Bloggs View Post
            Report to who? Are they a member of UK professional body? HMRC tell you that the responsibility for correct tax payment is the individual's responsibility. The accountants claim IPSE affiliation. Report them to IPSE? What will IPSE do? If you use this advertising scheme as suggested by the IPSE affiliate, will IPSE defend you when Hector calls? I wonder...........
            If one looks at the accountant's page, they have won numerous awards and are a member of various bodies.

            Assuming the story is true (I don't doubt the OP, but one has to treat everything one reads on the internet with a healthy pinch of scepticism) and that the accountant is that one that google throws up, then it does need looking into.

            But as far as IPSE being in some way "responsible" - that's like saying that because I am a Microsoft certified developer, Microsoft are somehow responsible if I screw up a client's system.

            If the OP wants to PM me with any correspondence that details the scheme on offer, I will be glad to pass on to the office.
            Last edited by mudskipper; 7 November 2017, 06:57.

            Comment


              #26
              Originally posted by mudskipper View Post
              But as far as IPSE being in some way "responsible"
              Apart from you, who sad that? I have made a different point entirely, which, true to form you choose to ignore entirely.
              Public Service Posting by the BBC - Bloggs Bulls**t Corp.
              Officially CUK certified - Thick as f**k.

              Comment


                #27
                Originally posted by Fred Bloggs View Post
                Apart from you, who sad that? I have made a different point entirely, which, true to form you choose to ignore entirely.
                It’s a standard response - I had the same when brookson became a partner as let’s be honest their history isn’t exactly whiter than white
                merely at clientco for the entertainment

                Comment


                  #28
                  DNS

                  Originally posted by Fred Bloggs View Post
                  Report to who? Are they a member of UK professional body? HMRC tell you that the responsibility for correct tax payment is the individual's responsibility. The accountants claim IPSE affiliation. Report them to IPSE? What will IPSE do? If you use this advertising scheme as suggested by the IPSE affiliate, will IPSE defend you when Hector calls? I wonder...........
                  Several of their management team are regulated by ICAEW and CIMA. They're also part of FCSA. The firm itself is not regulated by one of the accountancy bodies, purely by the FCSA. So reporting could be to HMRC, FCSA and the regulatory body of the guy who recommended the OP to alleged tax avoidance scheme. Could also take this up with the directors of the main DNS practice and advise them that one of their franchisees is promoting/facilitating which also leaves them exposed to prosecution.

                  Comment


                    #29
                    Originally posted by mudskipper View Post
                    Assuming the story is true (I don't doubt the OP, but one has to treat everything one reads on the internet with a healthy pinch of scepticism) and that the accountant is that one that google throws up, then it does need looking into.

                    But as far as IPSE being in some way "responsible" - that's like saying that because I am a Microsoft certified developer, Microsoft are somehow responsible if I screw up a client's system.

                    If the OP wants to PM me with any correspondence that details the scheme on offer, I will be glad to pass on to the office.
                    This...though I wasn't thinking report to IPSE. Unsure what they could do beyond potentially remove the accountant's affiliation with them.

                    OP - you've gone quiet in this thread, but if you're prepared to stand by your original comments with your real name, PM me (or email chris at maslins dot co dot uk) and we can take this further.

                    Comment


                      #30
                      Originally posted by eek View Post
                      It’s a standard response - I had the same when brookson became a partner as let’s be honest their history isn’t exactly whiter than white
                      Correct. It seems a standard part of the lobotomisation. Any concerns I aired about the Bookson tie up were dismissed as "hearsay". And any request regarding any financial kick backs are, of course, "confidential".
                      Public Service Posting by the BBC - Bloggs Bulls**t Corp.
                      Officially CUK certified - Thick as f**k.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X