• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Another attack on 'schemes'

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Another attack on 'schemes'

    Spotlight 12: Taxing the rewards for work carried out for a UK based employer (23 August 2011)
    HMRC are aware that new tax avoidance schemes that seek to avoid Income Tax and National Insurance contributions (NICs) are being advertised to contractors, highly paid employees and those using recruitment agencies. It is claimed that these schemes get around new disguised remuneration rules.

    Arrangements may involve payments passing through a series of companies, loans from a third party or an offshore alleged employer, a deed of covenant, secondments from one employer company to another or claims of self employment, etc. In HMRC’s opinion these arrangements do not succeed in avoiding the tax and NICs due. HMRC will challenge these arrangements and litigate where necessary to recover unpaid tax and NICs.

    Current legislation ensures that rewards and recognition from working for UK-based businesses are charged appropriately to UK Income Tax and NICs. This legislation applies whether the rewards are routed through employee benefit trusts, employer funded retirement benefit schemes or through any other intermediaries, either as loans, transfers of assets or other payments. The legislation will also apply to such third party arrangements where an employment is disguised as self employment or a contractual arrangement.

    Those intent on avoiding Income Tax and NICs by using trust arrangements should also be aware that there could be adverse Inheritance Tax (IHT) and trust tax consequences regardless of whether they themselves set up the trust. These include IHT charges when contributions are made to the trust, when funds are transferred from a trust to a sub-trust or removed from the sub-trust, when uncommercial loans are made by the trustees and at the ten year anniversary of the trust.
    Connect with me on LinkedIn

    Follow us on Twitter.

    ContractorUK Best Forum Advisor 2015

    #2
    I bet virtually every promoter, who was affected by last December's disguised remuneration rules, had a new scheme up and running virtually straight away.

    Last time I did a straw poll of firms offering these types of schemes to contractors I worked out there must be in the region of 10,000 people using them.

    I make no bones about the fact that I hate HMRC (probably even more than AtW hates us BN66ers) but it's an impossible situation they're in trying to plug these loopholes.

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by LisaContractorUmbrella View Post
      Spotlight 12: Taxing the rewards for work carried out for a UK based employer (23 August 2011)
      HMRC are aware that new tax avoidance schemes that seek to avoid Income Tax and National Insurance contributions (NICs) are being advertised to contractors, highly paid employees and those using recruitment agencies. It is claimed that these schemes get around new disguised remuneration rules.

      Arrangements may involve payments passing through a series of companies, loans from a third party or an offshore alleged employer, a deed of covenant, secondments from one employer company to another or claims of self employment, etc. In HMRC’s opinion these arrangements do not succeed in avoiding the tax and NICs due. HMRC will challenge these arrangements and litigate where necessary to recover unpaid tax and NICs.

      Current legislation ensures that rewards and recognition from working for UK-based businesses are charged appropriately to UK Income Tax and NICs. This legislation applies whether the rewards are routed through employee benefit trusts, employer funded retirement benefit schemes or through any other intermediaries, either as loans, transfers of assets or other payments. The legislation will also apply to such third party arrangements where an employment is disguised as self employment or a contractual arrangement.

      Those intent on avoiding Income Tax and NICs by using trust arrangements should also be aware that there could be adverse Inheritance Tax (IHT) and trust tax consequences regardless of whether they themselves set up the trust. These include IHT charges when contributions are made to the trust, when funds are transferred from a trust to a sub-trust or removed from the sub-trust, when uncommercial loans are made by the trustees and at the ten year anniversary of the trust.
      Is there a point to all this bumph your posting Lisa, we have already assertained you don't understand the schemes so I can only assume you are scaremongering for marketing reasons ? If HMRC don't believe they are legal lets see their legal opinion, whats that, they wont publish it ? Whyever not ? I think I might know why, perhaps because they cant explain why they think it does not work not with sound legal argument only the usual rhetoric.

      Comment


        #4
        Very interesting Lisa. Good to be kept up to date.

        I think anyone would be well advised to steer well clear of these schemes.

        In the end you only save a few percent. A good accountant can get you up to 70% of your income or a bit more from a Ltd.

        An offshore scheme gives you about 10% more with the risk of losing not just everything you've earnt, but even more than that later on.
        I'm alright Jack

        Comment


          #5
          I think Lisa has a right to raise these points. I'm no HMRC apologist either but paying ZERO tax on earnings around £100k is both supremely risky and morally wrong. All IMO of course. And as BB says a decent accountant can get you not much less.

          Lisa, can you post up a link as well?

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by BlasterBates View Post
            Very interesting Lisa. Good to be kept up to date.

            I think anyone would be well advised to steer well clear of these schemes.

            In the end you only save a few percent. A good accountant can get you up to 70% of your income or a bit more from a Ltd.

            An offshore scheme gives you about 10% more with the risk of losing not just everything you've earnt, but even more than that later on.
            15 % extra or 15 grand in the example above would be nearer the mark and no IR35 concerns

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by Just1morethen View Post
              I think Lisa has a right to raise these points. I'm no HMRC apologist either but paying ZERO tax on earnings around £100k is both supremely risky and morally wrong. All IMO of course. And as BB says a decent accountant can get you not much less.

              Lisa, can you post up a link as well?
              HMRC linky

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by geoff from contracta IOM View Post
                Is there a point to all this bumph your posting Lisa, we have already assertained you don't understand the schemes so I can only assume you are scaremongering for marketing reasons ? If HMRC don't believe they are legal lets see their legal opinion, whats that, they wont publish it ? Whyever not ? I think I might know why, perhaps because they cant explain why they think it does not work not with sound legal argument only the usual rhetoric.
                Why attack me Geoff I am doing what I have done in this forum for the last 3 or 4 years and that is to give advice or information that I think is relevant to the contractors who post on this forum. I know you don't like what I am saying, and I can appreciate why, but I think, and have always believed, that contractors have a right to know what's going on.
                Connect with me on LinkedIn

                Follow us on Twitter.

                ContractorUK Best Forum Advisor 2015

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by geoff from contracta IOM View Post
                  15 % extra or 15 grand in the example above would be nearer the mark and no IR35 concerns
                  There's more than IR35 to be worries about in these schemes.

                  And lay off Lisa - all she did was post verbatim from HMRC. Hardly marketing.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    All I'll say is that nothing that HMRC has published in the last few months since the Dec 9th change in legislation even comes close to troubling most providers.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X