Cost of a losing an IR35 case?

[sim2kuk]

Which isn't really going to happen is it.

Back to your own thread foul knave.

Wow, you've really been rattled by me haven't you?

What isn't going to happen?

[PTP]

But HMRC's starting point will probably be that you cannot offset any CT paid because you've passed the time limit to amend your CT600 (but then probably won't sustain that position).

A few months ago when QDOS were making calls to discuss increasing the level of TLC35 cover, their calculation of the recommended level of cover assumed that you'll be able to offset any CT paid.....Let's hope that would be the case.

[northernladuk]

Wow, you've really been rattled by me haven't you?

Yep. Quaking in my boots.

What isn't going to happen?

Clients going back on their original determination unless there is a good business reason to do so. I. E. They've changed their policy /working practices. If that's the case then there is no risk as its not the same scenario

So, investigation is started post April. Pre-April client says role is outside IR35, supplies an outside IR35 contract, and then 3 weeks later supplies an inside IR35 determination on role.

That's misrepresentation from the client. In that circumstance surely the contractor has a case against the client.

You are just making up fanciful situations that just won't happen.

Now take it back to your thread or start another so not taking my excellent post off topic.

[WordIsBond]

Have we ever run the numbers on a year's worth of liabilities?

For me, at least three times as much as you, because I'm worth at least three of you.

[JohntheBike]

Following a couple questions about the liability amounts of a reto inspection..

Have we ever run the numbers on a year's worth of liabilities?

Extra tax owed minus what's been paid plus potential interest type thing?

I can't say I've seen the answer to this question - who has the liability fallen on, the individual contractor or the Ltd. Co.? My understanding is that it is the Ltd. Co. that should have applied the IR35 rules and so the liability would be on the Ltd. Co. not the individual, providing that the individual director had taken reasonable care and hadn't acted fraudulently. So if there were not enough funds in the Ltd. Co, it would be declared insolvent. But I've not heard of any examples as to how this liability had been addressed. The "individual" cases wouldn't be discussed by HMRC, but some anecdotal evidence would be useful.

[northernladuk]

I can't say I've seen the answer to this question - who has the liability fallen on, the individual contractor or the Ltd. Co.? My understanding is that it is the Ltd. Co. that should have applied the IR35 rules and so the liability would be on the Ltd. Co. not the individual, providing that the individual director had taken reasonable care and hadn't acted fraudulently. So if there were not enough funds in the Ltd. Co, it would be declared insolvent. But I've not heard of any examples as to how this liability had been addressed. The "individual" cases wouldn't be discussed by HMRC, but some anecdotal evidence would be useful.

For someone that's actually been to court, albeit in the somewhere around the Efwardian era, I thought you know better John.. But hey why let a thread pass without adding your tedious ramblings.

Try thinking about how the money is taxed as it goes through the Ltd normally and then how it would go through if it was gross and needed PAYE applying. Where does the difference in tax apply?

[northernladuk]

For me, at least three times as much as you, because I'm worth at least three of you.

To be fair, this is probably the most factually correct post on this thread so far.

[JohntheBike]

For someone that's actually been to court, albeit in the somewhere around the Efwardian era, I thought you know better John.. But hey why let a thread pass without adding your tedious ramblings.

Try thinking about how the money is taxed as it goes through the Ltd normally and then how it would go through if it was gross and needed PAYE applying. Where does the difference in tax apply?

question too difficult for you? I'm asking for actual examples of what happened to those that were found subject to IR35 and were served with a large tax bill. We've heard nothing about how the BBC presenters have paid the bills. What has my having gone to court have anything to do with the question? You demean yourself with your constant attacks on me. I'm convinced you are an HMRC mole!

[northernladyuk]

Oii. Piss off you lot. This is the best question that's been asked on the forums this year. Please show it, and the OP the professional respect they deserve!

Nobody here wants to discuss the effects of IR35 changes on a submissive toilet trader.

[northernladyuk]

question too difficult for you? I'm asking for actual examples of what happened to those that were found subject to IR35 and were served with a large tax bill. We've heard nothing about how the BBC presenters have paid the bills. What has my having gone to court have anything to do with the question? You demean yourself with your constant attacks on me. I'm convinced you are an HMRC mole!

No. He demeans you.