Accountants

[THEPUMA]

It would only be PSC's due to clauses 61B 1(a)-(c), which pretty much defines a PSC.

[THEPUMA]

I've now had a call back from the PCG who in turn have spoken to the TReasury and apparently the exemption in clause 3 does apply. The question therefore reverts to what defines an accountant.

In my opinion, raising invoices will be overstepping the mark as will effecting bank transactions. But what about doing weekly calculations of tax due? I have provided spreadsheets that do that for some of our PSC's.

Some interesting test cases await us no doubt. But in the meantime, we are all at risk, except those contractors without an accountant!

[simondolan]

I've now had a call back from the PCG who in turn have spoken to the TReasury and apparently the exemption in clause 3 does apply. The question therefore reverts to what defines an accountant.

In my opinion, raising invoices will be overstepping the mark as will effecting bank transactions. But what about doing weekly calculations of tax due? I have provided spreadsheets that do that for some of our PSC's.

Some interesting test cases await us no doubt. But in the meantime, we are all at risk, except those contractors without an accountant!

I don't agree we are all at risk. For example - What defines an accountant? maybe a firm that are recognised as accountants, that act for a variety of different businesses, are qualified, have PI insurance would be a pretty good start.

[cykophysh39]

Does all this legislation chat pertain to Prostitutes?
or are they still excempt?

[THEPUMA]

That's not a particularly hard set of criteria to fulfil though, is it? Which of those, with a bit of recruitment, would Giant, 1st Contact et al not be able to fulfil?

[malvolio]

It would only be PSC's due to clauses 61B 1(a)-(c), which pretty much defines a PSC.

No no NO!!

It defines PSC as a term used in the documentation and gives it the accepted acronym for use in that document. A "PSC" or a "Personal Service Company" has no other wider legal context than that. The range of buisinesses that could be defined as PSCs (spit) is vast, from IT consultants to corner shops.

An MSC, however, already is a term in common usage and one that defines a particular kind of business, so no problems with that.

As soon as you start defining, or accepting the definiton of companies into various sub-classifications other than already exist, Gay Gordon will have won. If he wants to do such things, he will have to go the Parliament and get the necessary legal context created.

So stop doing it.

[Bluebird]

No no NO!!

It defines PSC as a term used in the documentation and gives it the accepted acronym for use in that document. A "PSC" or a "Personal Service Company" has no other wider legal context than that. The range of buisinesses that could be defined as PSCs (spit) is vast, from IT consultants to corner shops.

An MSC, however, already is a term in common usage and one that defines a particular kind of business, so no problems with that.

As soon as you start defining, or accepting the definiton of companies into various sub-classifications other than already exist, Gay Gordon will have won. If he wants to do such things, he will have to go the Parliament and get the necessary legal context created.

So stop doing it.

HMRC refer to PSC in it's documentation...
However Companies House doesn't ?

[malvolio]

HMRC refer to PSC in it's documentation...
However Companies House doesn't ?

Like I said it is common practice in HMG documents to define a phrase (for example, Change Request Activation Process) and its acronym (CR.. OK, bad example...) on first usage, and to use the acronym thereafter, just to save a lot of pointless typing. It is merely shorthand, and does not define anything outside that particular document

[THEPUMA]

Malvolio misunderstood my point, which may not have been well-made. The legislation does not define a PSC. It seeks to define an MSC.

Clauses 61B 1(a)-(c) describe a company that provides the services of an individual to other persons and pay the majority of the income received to the individual more tax efficiently than by way of salary.

Which to my mind covers pretty much any PSC (sorry Malvolio).

Clause 1d says that an MSC provider has to be involved but that you are not an MSC provider "Merely by virtue of providing legal or accountancy services".

So an MSC is a PSC (sorry Malvolio) whose accountant provides more than merely accountancy services.

Which I think is incredibly vague.

[Bluebird]

Doesn't the document...

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/consultations...-companies.pdf


state though, what is defined as a MSC and a PSC, then go on to specifically that the measures taken only apply to MSCs and PSCs are ok ?