Claiming back expenses

[daviejones]

Can someone tell me how the IR really does keep a handle on dodgy expenses.

I just found out that one of my colleagues for the past 6 months has put through their expenses everything from blank DVDs, storage boxes for home, batteries, stationary, postgae of stuff to family, stamps by the hundreds etc as expenses that do not apply to the contract they currently workon where everything is provided...it's insane not to mention dishonest.

It clearly states in paperwork did you incur this cost wholly in line wit the current contract you're on. No they didn't but they claim, the umbrella signs it off providing they have a receipt and hey presto lots of free money.

The growing trend is they get away with it and so more follow suit meaning in the end the IR are losing loads of money when if they clamped fown ages ago job done. I won't even mention flat rate subsistence of £16 with no receipts!!!!

Drives me mad, I won't do it but I feel cheated!

Get over yourself...what's with all this holier than thou crap?

[Integrity]

It clearly states in paperwork did you incur this cost wholly in line wit the current contract you're on. No they didn't but they claim, the umbrella signs it off providing they have a receipt and hey presto lots of free money.

Where does it say that expenses must be related to a current project you are working on? What about the next project, and the project after that?

[TheBigYinJames]

at some point someone is going to come after you for a lot of money

They sure will, I've seen it happen. Life is definitely too short to mess with the taxman, which is why I closed down LtdCo years ago and do everything through a brolly. Sure I'm losing a certain amount of money I could get back by avoiding IR35 with a LtdCo, but I've got a life, interests outside of money and work. I make plenty as it is, and best of all, I don't have any forms to fill. While a young guy, or a single guy, is perfectly entitled to seek to maximise income on their earnings, that doesn't mean people who choose not to bother are somehow mugs.

It's very unsexy to see a young contractor earning 6 figures STILL bitching about what other people are making/faking/creaming.

BTW If you are the Lisa I think you are, we spoke on the phone many years ago

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

Hi BigYinJames

Well I must admit I don't recognise you from your picture but you could well be right

[Pondlife]

snip...

And if you want to claim the moral high ground on avoiding taxation as a contractor, first go and cost up how much you don't cost UK PLC by not having all those trivial employee benefits like sick pay, holiday pay, pensions, training and access to employment protection. that's why we pay less tax.

IMO those are built into your daily/hourly rate and aren't really a good reason to justify hi divs/low salary.

This is about expenses and what's fair game for the big boys needs to be allowable for us one man bands in order to be competitive and win work.

[malvolio]

IMO those are built into your daily/hourly rate and aren't really a good reason to justify hi divs/low salary.

This is about expenses and what's fair game for the big boys needs to be allowable for us one man bands in order to be competitive and win work.

No, diasgree totally. Legally and finacnially there is no difference between MyCo and Tesco, other than the CT rate and audit requirements. If we start believing NL's bo****cks that somehow we are not real companies engaged in a real trade, then we may as well all go permie.

[Pondlife]

No, diasgree totally. Legally and finacnially there is no difference between MyCo and Tesco, other than the CT rate and audit requirements. If we start believing NL's bo****cks that somehow we are not real companies engaged in a real trade, then we may as well all go permie.

Eh.. which bit are you disagreeing with? My first point is that our day rate reflects the lack of holidays, pensions, benefits etc - not the fact that we should be able to pay less tax.

The 2nd is that that we are businesses (as you say, much like Tesco) and therefore the rules that apply to them should be allowed to apply for us. That is, we should be able to offset the costs of running the business (hardware, software, training, postage etc) as much as they can.

Have I/you missunderstood a post somewhere?

[NotAllThere]

...What I'm talking about is ethics. When you avoid NI through a tax loophole, it may be legal, but that doesn't make it ethical. ...You think they are unethical by putting a £1000 scanner through their expenses.

No, I think it is illegal/fraudulent/evasion for a brolly company employee to put through a scanner claim on their expenses.

Law defines what is ethical. Anything beyond that is opinion. Though it's always feasible to appeal to a higher law.

[malvolio]

That is, we should be able to offset the costs of running the business

Ah, different use of English, so I'm misreading what you said. Yes we should, and in fact we do. Sorry.

[TheBigYinJames]

Law defines what is ethical.

I hope that was irony. If not, I fear for you.