Legal Expenses : Claiming Back

[JaredM]

Perhaps just write to HMRC stating you're following the example set by MPs :-)

[blacjac]

SO if employee of big co paid for the review on his personal credit card because he had left his company one in his other trousers, it would not be offsettable against tax either?

[MPwannadecentincome]

But the contract will be between the client/agency and the umbrella company. He'd probably just be a named contractor on it.

True but the brolly won't be negotiating with the agent on employee's behalf? The brolly is just the middle man here whatever is in that contract between agent and brolly is effectively the same as the agent and the employee, i.e. if agent says they will pay 28 days after the end of the month of the timesheet submission then its no skin off the brolly's nose, only the employees.

[NotAllThere]

SO if employee of big co paid for the review on his personal credit card because he had left his company one in his other trousers, it would not be offsettable against tax either?

Well, that's what puzzles me. Perhaps there needs to be another classification.

I spend some of my money on behalf of the company, and the company repays me. But it wasn't an expense of mine that was being reimbursed. Perhaps it should be considered as a loan.

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

The point of this is to understand the difference between a cost to the company and an expense. All sales that you make are recorded on your sales ledger; all purchases on the purchase ledger - as in the case of this legal bill. There are many other aspects to consider but, basically, the difference between the 2 will give your profit on which corporation tax is then applied.

The original question was regarding putting the bill through an umbrella company as an expense. As the contractor is an employee of the umbrella company the bill would be offset against the income tax that the contractor is personally liable for but the contractor would have to prove that the expense was incurred wholly and exclusively because of the work he was doing. In this case IMHO that cannot be proved.

[Board Game Geek]

Okies the full story for the review.

I was working for secondary agency via another primary agency and getting paid by an umbrella.

Secondary agency were cut loose by the Client.

One the following day, the Client decided to hire me direct.

The primary agency complained, saying that I couldn't work for the Client.

Client said "Feck off, the Primary agency are nothing to do with us, and we have no relationship with them. We DID with the secondary agency, but we have fired them. (Seconday Agency were an outsourced department of the Client)"

Primary agency tried to invoke non-solicitation clause in their contract, but my solicitor noted that they forgot to include it in my last contract. Plsu other errors they made as well.

Primary agency then tried to wag the tail of the dog of the Umbrella, and get their non-solicitation clause to bear on me.

However, the umbrella cocked up big time (One of the big 3), because they made a number of major errors in how they handled the introduction of their own non-solicitation cause (and by the looks of it, not just to me, but to many other contractors as well) . My lawyer ripped them to pieces.

The review was of the old contracts, which may have stopped me working for the End Client.

Hence, it was a cost incurred, that enabled me to carry out my business legally.

HTH

[MPwannadecentincome]

Okies the full story for the review.

I was working for secondary agency via another primary agency and getting paid by an umbrella.

Secondary agency were cut loose by the Client.

One the following day, the Client decided to hire me direct.

The primary agency complained, saying that I couldn't work for the Client.

Client said "flip off, the Primary agency are nothing to do with us, and we have no relationship with them. We DID with the secondary agency, but we have fired them. (Seconday Agency were an outsourced department of the Client)"

Primary agency tried to invoke non-solicitation clause in their contract, but my solicitor noted that they forgot to include it in my last contract. Plsu other errors they made as well.

Primary agency then tried to wag the tail of the dog of the Umbrella, and get their non-solicitation clause to bear on me.

However, the umbrella cocked up big time (One of the big 3), because they made a number of major errors in how they handled the introduction of their own non-solicitation cause (and by the looks of it, not just to me, but to many other contractors as well) . My lawyer ripped them to pieces.

The review was of the old contracts, which may have stopped me working for the End Client.

Hence, it was a cost incurred, that enabled me to carry out my business legally.

HTH

blimey!