Help Required: IR35 neglected

[djhns]

Fred Bloggs obviously has comprehension problems.

I have decided to take the ethical route if you get the jist.

"Guys, any suggestions??" Is referring to Accounting firms which can assist with all the amendments.

God forbid you ever get investigated on your affairs..... who knows what skeletons could be found!

[djhns]

Well well.... how the tides have turned.

I've had two other companies review my contract and they are both saying that it is outside IR35.

So now, i will just continue as usual and proceed with winding the company up.

Much thanks everyone for all your assistance.

[malvolio]

Much as I hate to say "We told you so", but http://forums.contractoruk.com/869253-post14.html et seq...

[PhilAtBFCA]

Regulation 72

djhns

Just had the opportunity to read the whole of this thread and its a great story really when read end - end. Thanks :-)

One thing maybe you should consider is Regulation 72 , even if the company is closed and you willfully knew the contract was Inside ir35 HMRC can, have recourse to you personally, and there is no time limit.

The point is "willfully knew" which comes into the same discussion as "reasonable care" according to HMRC's view of you as a taxpayer. ( Reasonable Care definition is important for new regime of penalties and interest )

Can you rely on these opinions ? Did you seek opinions until you got the "right" one ? I would recommend in this case that your IR35 opinion is separate from the accountancy firm taking on the closure of the company, I do not normally think this in most trading cases but in your case I think you would be better off doing that, especially as the opinion is dated way after the tax is due.

This is not meant to be a FUD or scary post BTW, just trying to stick to facts.

Phil

[Fred Bloggs]

Interesting post Phil.

[djhns]

Well... i dont' know for sure as i'm not an expert.

I have relied on what i've been told. And based on 2 contract reviewers, they are saying it's outside IR35.

Therefore, i believe i have done everything to the best of my knowledge and from professional advice.

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

When you sought professional opinion were you asked about your working practises or was the opinion based on just reading the contract? A contract can be written to be outside IR35 but if your working practises are not accurately reflected within that contract it would have no value in the event of an investigation.

[ASB]

One thing maybe you should consider is Regulation 72 , even if the company is closed and you willfully knew the contract was Inside ir35 HMRC can, have recourse to you personally, and there is no time limit.

The point is "willfully knew" which comes into the same discussion as "reasonable care" according to HMRC's view of you as a taxpayer. ( Reasonable Care definition is important for new regime of penalties and interest )

Those pesky transfer of obligations rules. They are completely unreasonable, because it's just yet another thing that removes obligation from HMRC and places it back on the taxpayer; specifically designed to remove any idea of certainty. Even trying to take due diligence from a taxpayer point of view make this more difficult. Opinions on any transaction will, of course, always differ.

Of course, in the case of the OP he/she has a significant problem. They got an initial review saying "in" and two further reviews saying "out". If I were HMIT and had picked up this case I know what I'd be saying. It wouldn't likely be "well that's OK, they obviously did their best".

[Fred Bloggs]

But, by now, the OP will have burnt the first opinion and he will have foergotten it ever existed. How would HMRC ever get to know if you didn't tell them?