BN66 - Time to fight back!!!

[elpinar]

Lewis - you ask y we move to a new scheme while the other is under investigation and I think the simple answer for most of us on that is because iot was done as smoke and mirrors and we don’t know the details- that was my earlier point – we now seem to be paying 10% and we don’t really know what for …… if I could go to limited tomorrow I would as I don’t think im happy with the sketchy details i know of the new scheme – however am stuck now till my contract runs out in 3mths – as to get it re done – get internal legal to review etc etc causes me too much problem where I am .

Ps how do you get to keep 75% on as limited co if your other half is a higher rate tax payer – genuinely v v v interested.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

I am constantly amazed when I read this thread that you are moving to a new scheme whilst be investigated on an old one. Out of interest I did a beer mat calc on a £100K contract, 10% fees, 20K salary and the rest as "loans". I came up with about 83% take home.

Now with a Ltd you can get 75%-80%+ depending on circumstances. Highest is when you are married with non-working wife/husband and you max out both your lower tax bands.

Plus you can get IR35 insurance that pays out tax, penalties and interest in the event of the case being lost (QDOS Consulting's TLC35 product).

Why do you guys take such risks for a few grand a year?! I understand that years ago IR35 was considered much more of a risk. But with the IR35 score currently at 1462 wins to 6 loses for PCG memebers plus products like TLC35 the difference in risk between an off-shore loan scheme and Ltd is order of magnitudes apart.

Plus, dare I risk the moral argument, at least you are paying something to the the country rather than the 10% to Montpelier.

Surely going limited has got to be better than just putting the money in a CTD and hoping you won't get caught. Go Ltd and sleep easy!

I agree, except what about if you can't work outside IR35? Or is that pretty much a non-issue these days? For the 3 years I was in the MTM scheme, the nature of my work for the client would definitely have been caught by ir35, and there was no QDOS around at the time to help reword contracts etc.

[BrilloPad]

I am constantly amazed when I read this thread that you are moving to a new scheme whilst be investigated on an old one. Out of interest I did a beer mat calc on a £100K contract, 10% fees, 20K salary and the rest as "loans". I came up with about 83% take home.

Now with a Ltd you can get 75%-80%+ depending on circumstances. Highest is when you are married with non-working wife/husband and you max out both your lower tax bands.

Plus you can get IR35 insurance that pays out tax, penalties and interest in the event of the case being lost (QDOS Consulting's TLC35 product).

Why do you guys take such risks for a few grand a year?! I understand that years ago IR35 was considered much more of a risk. But with the IR35 score currently at 1462 wins to 6 loses for PCG memebers plus products like TLC35 the difference in risk between an off-shore loan scheme and Ltd is order of magnitudes apart.

Plus, dare I risk the moral argument, at least you are paying something to the the country rather than the 10% to Montpelier.

Surely going limited has got to be better than just putting the money in a CTD and hoping you won't get caught. Go Ltd and sleep easy!

personally I am moving to ltd.

And no, you can't risk the moral argument. We had all this with Bradley! Seperate thread started and he got caned. Would you like me to resurrect it so you can post on it and get caned too?

No text books down the trousers either...

[Lewis]

I agree, except what about if you can't work outside IR35? Or is that pretty much a non-issue these days? For the 3 years I was in the MTM scheme, the nature of my work for the client would definitely have been caught by ir35, and there was no QDOS around at the time to help reword contracts etc.

I think yes you can pretty much not worry about IR35 now. The odds of being investigated are very low, the odds of then losing are very low. Things might change in the future but with insurance in place, the correct contract wording and you thinking and acting like a business you are going to be pretty much safe. Because lets face it you ARE a business. I believe you can do this at any client. But you must join the PCG and/or QDOS and get your contracts reviewed.

[Lewis]

personally I am moving to ltd.

And no, you can't risk the moral argument. We had all this with Bradley! Seperate thread started and he got caned. Would you like me to resurrect it so you can post on it and get caned too?

No text books down the trousers either...

Don't get me wrong. My point was not that an off-shore scheme is immoral, rather that, all other things being equal (i.e. if you can get a comparable take home percentage) I feel it better to give the 10% to the government than to Montpelier. BUT I am not a fan of this government, don't agree with the way they spend our taxes etc.. etc.. so I have no interest resurrecting the argument as I don't feel that strongly either way.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

I think yes you can pretty much not worry about IR35 now.

So all that ir35 has really achieved over the past 7 years is to drive a load of us underground into a plethera of avoidance schemes, MSCs etc, which the government is now having to litigate/legislate against. I bet ir35 has hardly earned them any extra tax revenue but I don't suppose anyone will be brought to account for wasting public money on it. What a shambles and a complete waste of time.

I suppose it creates jobs for the boys at HMRC, and I bet they've never been busier!!!

[max]

Don't get me wrong. My point was not that an off-shore scheme is immoral, rather that, all other things being equal (i.e. if you can get a comparable take home percentage) I feel it better to give the 10% to the government than to Montpelier. BUT I am not a fan of this government, don't agree with the way they spend our taxes etc.. etc.. so I have no interest resurrecting the argument as I don't feel that strongly either way.

So exactly how much tax do you think you would accept paying? Given that they provide school, roads, police, universities etc?

[max]

Lewis - you ask y we move to a new scheme while the other is under investigation and I think the simple answer for most of us on that is because iot was done as smoke and mirrors and we don’t know the details- that was my earlier point – we now seem to be paying 10% and we don’t really know what for …… if I could go to limited tomorrow I would as I don’t think im happy with the sketchy details i know of the new scheme – however am stuck now till my contract runs out in 3mths – as to get it re done – get internal legal to review etc etc causes me too much problem where I am .

Out of interest, what % of tax would you accept as reasonable, given the services they make available to you?

Ps how do you get to keep 75% on as limited co if your other half is a higher rate tax payer – genuinely v v v interested.

Utilise the BATR and the new capital gain regime...ie: 10% tax on the first million. It was introduced this year...so they are unlikely to change it...perhaps

Use google.

[Douglas]

Utilise the BATR and the new capital gain regime...ie: 10% tax on the first million. It was introduced this year...so they are unlikely to change it...perhaps

Max,

Does this work ? I have seen it mentioned on the SJD sticky thread on this forum but my accountant is of the opinion that it can only be used on retirement. His view is that HMRC will not tolerate capital distribution if you wind up one company and then start trading in the same line of work with a new one.

D

[Lewis]

Ps how do you get to keep 75% on as limited co if your other half is a higher rate tax payer – genuinely v v v interested.

When I was with an MSC years ago (same as running your own limited) I was consistently going into the higher rate tax bracket and took home between 70%-75%. Depending upon expenses, rate, holidays etc..

Now I have my own limited company and my wife takes dividends (she doesn't work, we have 50/50 dividends) I am now getting approx. 82%.

If your other half is a higher rate tax payer then you cannot do the dividend thing, so you are back to 70%-75%. But you can make large pension payments for example, not that bad an idea.