• 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!

PGMOL, FTT v2

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

    PGMOL, FTT v2

    While I'm sure it's all very interesting from a legal perspective, the original sum alleged due as tax was just shy of £600k.

    I wonder how much the process of trying to recover this has cost; FTT, UT, Appeal and Supreme Court time and representation costs will I suspect have been chunky. Only for FTT v2 to reach the same conclusion as FTT v1 albeit with additional clarifications.

    While the FTT v2 judgement is superbly reasoned and clear, I can't help but wonder whether this whole process really provides tax-payer value for money.

    I do hope that PGMOL is able to recover costs.

    #2
    For comparison, the Arctic Systems case which followed a similar path,was reportedly arond £700k. That was 20 years ago....
    Blog? What blog...?

    Comment


      #3
      The bill is going to be £1.5m or so you need to have a rich organisation fighting your corner.
      merely at clientco for the entertainment

      Comment


        #4
        Interesting. The write up is pretty long so I made a little summary. Most of it does not translate into the typical IT contractor situation very well though ?

        Independent professional judgment
        Referees controlled how they performed the core task on match day and exercised their own expertise without employer-style supervision.
        Regulatory control, not managerial control
        The rules and standards came mainly from football regulators, not from PGMOL acting like an employer directing employees.
        Freedom to accept or reject work
        Referees could choose whether to take matches and could even withdraw after accepting without major consequence.
        No ongoing obligation between engagements
        Each match was a separate engagement. PGMOL did not have to offer work, and referees did not have to accept it.
        Lack of economic dependence/integration
        Most referees had other main jobs and were not financially dependent on PGMOL, making them look less like employees integrated into a business.

        Comment


          #5
          It was never a case that would translate well to the bum-on-seat IT contractor. I'm glad the FTT saw sense but I do worry that HMRC is going to waste more tax payers' money continuing to flog this dead horse.

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by ladymuck View Post
            ... I do worry that HMRC is going to waste more tax payers' money ...
            Don't worry - its not like they are going to run out !

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by sadkingbilly
              what, or who is PGMOL???
              Professional Game Match Officials Limited - they supply referees for premier league and English football league matches.

              Long running issue about whether referees are employees of this company or not. This week, they're not.

              Comment


                #8
                So HMRC has at last given up and will not further appeal.

                The good news is that they won't be wasting more taxpayers' money on this.

                In a fair world, PGMOL would have their costs reimbursed.

                Comment

                Working...
                X