BN66 - Time to fight back: Continued

[smalldog]

In these dark days its good to have a bit of a giggle. On that note a very funny thing happened on the way to work this morning.

I was sitting opposite some guy with a laptop, had a big set of earphones on and the laptop turned away from the aisle. Suddenly I hear, ‘yeah,yeah, come on baby, etc.etc..’ from the speakers really loud - he’s watching porno and hasn’t got the earphones plugged in properly.

Didnt realise for about 30 seconds, I was waving at him and pointing at my ears but he didn’t get it for ages…

if you're a poster then my apologies, but more likely to be HMRC

LOL!!!!

or do u think they have spiced up the HMRC online tax return website a bit to encourage us to file online?

[Toocan]

For what my opinion is worth, I would not stick with them for two reasons:

1) Many agencies and end clients will not deal with MP or similar schemes. When I was with them I found my own clients but almost lost them because they would not deal with MP direct. Now with MSC legislation etc, whether MP say they are exempt, clients and agencies just steer clear, so your future work is limited.

MP operate through a London based agency - are you saying that you clients won't deal with any agency, or only MP. If so, any idea why not?

[Toocan]

I was in contact with some of the people who went with the break-away SuoMotu scheme run by Alan Jones and Giles Morris (friends of Tim Warr).

I've had a look at Tim Warr's website. As far as I can tell he uses flaws that exist in some of the scheme's paper work (I know our trust deeds, consultancy agreements etc are not all the same) to have the 'work' reclassified as employment. Due to the PAYE rules this changes the tax liability and who has to pay it. I'd guess that certain staturory time limits also come into play here (i'm not sure of this).

Has anyone had any success with this method? Does it work? On the face of it, it looks like it could quarter the bill and end the HMRC investigation quickly.

[BrilloPad]

I've had a look at Tim Warr's website. As far as I can tell he uses flaws that exist in some of the scheme's paper work (I know our trust deeds, consultancy agreements etc are not all the same) to have the 'work' reclassified as employment. Due to the PAYE rules this changes the tax liability and who has to pay it. I'd guess that certain staturory time limits also come into play here (i'm not sure of this).

Has anyone had any success with this method? Does it work? On the face of it, it looks like it could quarter the bill and end the HMRC investigation quickly.

I understand some here know people who have approached TW. No feedback yet.

I can't see much mileage in it myself. montp are aware and are not in the least bit concerned - AFAIK no formal approach atall - they are focusing their efforts on the JR. As they should.

[BrilloPad]

MP operate through a London based agency - are you saying that you clients won't deal with any agency, or only MP. If so, any idea why not?

MP do have their own agency (I think it was WArrington though) - but that only has some jobs on it. Most need to use independant agencies....

Are you confusing limited company with agency?

[BrilloPad]

The lurker who was in that TW scheme(sumoto?) came past my desk and apologized for not passing on the settlement details. Soon as I have it I shall anonymize - then will pass out by PM/email. There **might** be something useful to the other side - one can't be too careful!

[twinkle]

MP do have their own agency (I think it was WArrington though) - but that only has some jobs on it. Most need to use independant agencies....

Are you confusing limited company with agency?

My agent has a contract with an agency in Warrington, they deal with MP. My agent has nothing to do with MP at all.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

My agent has a contract with an agency in Warrington, they deal with MP. My agent has nothing to do with MP at all.

You may find that if you ever have to use one of the big recruitment agents (eg. Alexander Mann), that they will not deal with the "agency in Warrington" which represents MP. Many of the big players now have a policy of only offering contracts to:

• Personal Service Companies
• Umbrellas which are fully signed up for PAYE

In my last assignment I had to get a letter from my brolly stating that I would only be paid via PAYE before the agency would agree to sign the contract.

As I said earlier, many of the big agencies have been warned through their accountants to steer clear of anything iffy.

[sortednet]

Must be PAYE somewhere nowadays

You may find that if you ever have to use one of the big recruitment agents (eg. Alexander Mann), that they will not deal with the "agency in Warrington" which represents MP. Many of the big players now have a policy of only offering contracts to:

• Personal Service Companies
• Umbrellas which are fully signed up for PAYE

In my last assignment I had to get a letter from my brolly stating that I would only be paid via PAYE before the agency would agree to sign the contract.

As I said earlier, many of the big agencies have been warned through their accountants to steer clear of anything iffy.

I have had to stop using MP as the 'payroll company' that my client uses (Hays) will not deal with MP. This is because I am not PAYE anywhere. I understand that all the large payroll companies have the policy mentioned above. I have spoken to quite a few agents who have been proposing contracts and they have all come back (sooner or later) with the same response.

[theoctopus]

the 'Warrington' agent

My current client required me to sign a declaration that none of the money paid 'for me' (or words to that effect) would go offshore. Had to go Ltd rather than use MP as a result. Given the retrospective tax changes since, this enforced move to Ltd has enabled me to sleep a little easier since. It still makes me wince if I think about the extra tax I am paying though.