HMRC Investigation Protection

[Lewis]

Which does make me think ... don't build up large sums of cash in the company.

[tarbera]

rubbish

The latter in 99% of cases.

not had any dealings with the taxman latley.? in there new hardline approch

[THEPUMA]

not had any dealings with the taxman latley.? in there new hardline approch

Fairly regular dealings, what with me being a tax accountant and all.

[THEPUMA]

Which does make me think ... don't build up large sums of cash in the company.

The downside being that you may end up paying higher rate tax on dividends which you could otherwise reduce or absolutely avoid if accumulated in the company.

[Lewis]

The downside being that you may end up paying higher rate tax on dividends which you could otherwise reduce or absolutely avoid if accumulated in the company.

Exactly!!

[northernladuk]

not had any dealings with the taxman latley.? in there new hardline approch

Tarbera shut the **** up for gods sake. How someone can fail so many times in one thread beggars belief.

[THEPUMA]

Exactly!!

I'm not sure if we are talking at cross purposes. My understanding is that you were suggesting that you draw out all of your earnings on an arising basis in order to insulate yourself against IR35 liabilities. I am saying that the downside to that course of action is that you will end up paying 25/36/46% on dividends which you could otherwise have left in the company and ultimately get out at somewhere between 0% and 10%.

Given the stats re number of IR35 enquiries, personally I would risk it for a biscuit.

[ASB]

What we don't know is what the settlement is.

The taxpayer didn't lose in entirety. They were judge as outside up until 31/12/03 and insider thereafter. HMRC will therefore be cancelling some of the assessments. At least that is how it seemed to me.

Though as THEPUMA said it looks likely the maximum actual exposure will be 2k unless HMRC can somehow make the transfer provisions stick.

[tarbera]

opps

Fairly regular dealings, what with me being a tax accountant and all.

I bow to your wisdom then sir.

So HMRC knew they would only get 2K from this case thus did they pick an easy target knowing the big boys like the PCG defenders were not involved and he was easy pickings to set preident.?

[malvolio]

I bow to your wisdom then sir.

So HMRC knew they would only get 2K from this case thus did they pick an easy target knowing the big boys like the PCG defenders were not involved and he was easy pickings to set preident.?

I can imagine PCG funding the appeal though. Too many dodgy conclusions in there to let this one go unchallenged.