HMRC fines and penalties insurance

[northernladuk]

I was under the impression that you can't insure against the results of conducting fraudulent practices as you can't insure insure yourself for doing something illegal.

Not sure about that but apparently trying to claim for something that wasn't taxable under the wholly exclusively rule means the insurance cost has a duality of purpose so fails wholly and exclusively itself.

It seems very complicated as you can claim it if the result of an investigation find that whatever discrepencies are taxable then its claimable. If they find something not taxable then you can't. I tried reading up but opinion seems divided. I think though insurining yourself against being caught fiddling the books would be pretty unclaimable.

Minor point but I thought it was interesting....

[JoannaUCF]

Joanna - Im confused. I might be wrong but I understood that this product will pay the fines imposed by HMRC if your late with CT or PAYE payments. Is this correct?

Its like offering 'car theft insurance'. If you get caught, insurance will pay to bail you out.

Surely, this sort of thing encourages people to 'try it on' and see if they can get away with it knowing that even if they get caught there are no consequences?

Hi there psychocandy

I'm not sure where this misunderstanding about this being a form of insurance has come from, it's definitely not what we do. We're a finance company. I have to admit, I love the idea of taking out Car Theft Insurance, in case I accidentally steal a Ferrari, though I'm not sure I'd get away with it! ☺

The message we’re giving is that if, for whatever reason, somebody (not just anybody, our products are only for freelance contractors) does not have sufficient funds to meet their tax liabilities, speak to us – we may be able to help. This product enables people to pay their taxes on time, should they find themselves in that situation.

To clarify – the product will not foot anybody’s fines, whether they don’t’ pay, can’t pay or forget to pay. It is not insurance.

Our clients have asked us for other products, which we haven’t always been able to help with, but in this instance, we can.

As I mentioned in my last post, feel free to pick up the phone and we can chat. It may be that you have other ideas about what the industry in general may benefit from, that banks don’t provide.

[psychocandy]

Hey Joanna - Fair play for coming on here though.

Right I think there is some confusion about what it is then. So its to pay CT rather than pay the fines?

I guess each to his own and I've seen plenty of people in the world that fail to grasp the concept that income earmarked for CT and/or VAT is not to be spent. So I guess you might have some people who may find this useful.

Not for me though - I don't spend my CT.

[northernladuk]

Hi there psychocandy

I'm not sure where this misunderstanding about this being a form of insurance has come from, it's definitely not what we do. We're a finance company. I have to admit, I love the idea of taking out Car Theft Insurance, in case I accidentally steal a Ferrari, though I'm not sure I'd get away with it! ☺

The message we’re giving is that if, for whatever reason, somebody (not just anybody, our products are only for freelance contractors) does not have sufficient funds to meet their tax liabilities, speak to us – we may be able to help. This product enables people to pay their taxes on time, should they find themselves in that situation.

To clarify – the product will not foot anybody’s fines, whether they don’t’ pay, can’t pay or forget to pay. It is not insurance.

Our clients have asked us for other products, which we haven’t always been able to help with, but in this instance, we can.

As I mentioned in my last post, feel free to pick up the phone and we can chat. It may be that you have other ideas about what the industry in general may benefit from, that banks don’t provide.

It is because the wording of the 'article' is so sales orientated it goes beyond confusing. How much do you pay for these 'articles' anyway? I guess you word them and the site just prints it?

The confusion is because you say 'relief from penalties' which comparing it to the term 'tax relief' or 'relief from pain' leads us (me anyway) to think you would minimise the actual penalty which has to have happened. Your offering would avoid penalties not provide relief on them surely?

To be fair I am from Yorkshire so English isn't my strong point but bearing in mind this is the second offering of yours that has been questioned I would be looking at the way you word them. Our questions surely must provide some feedback of how you word these.

BTW Do you know the links don't work at the bottom of your other smoke and mirrors offering for 'reducing IR35 risk'. The orange boxes don't work.

[JoannaUCF]

Hey Joanna - Fair play for coming on here though.

Right I think there is some confusion about what it is then. So its to pay CT rather than pay the fines?

I guess each to his own and I've seen plenty of people in the world that fail to grasp the concept that income earmarked for CT and/or VAT is not to be spent. So I guess you might have some people who may find this useful.

Not for me though - I don't spend my CT.

Morning psychocandy

That's the message, yes.

The good news is that we're keeping this new product so that the lump sum can be used for anything that somebody would use a lump sum of cash for.

Cheers
Joanna

[JoannaUCF]

It is because the wording of the 'article' is so sales orientated it goes beyond confusing. How much do you pay for these 'articles' anyway? I guess you word them and the site just prints it?

The confusion is because you say 'relief from penalties' which comparing it to the term 'tax relief' or 'relief from pain' leads us (me anyway) to think you would minimise the actual penalty which has to have happened. Your offering would avoid penalties not provide relief on them surely?

To be fair I am from Yorkshire so English isn't my strong point but bearing in mind this is the second offering of yours that has been questioned I would be looking at the way you word them. Our questions surely must provide some feedback of how you word these.

BTW Do you know the links don't work at the bottom of your other smoke and mirrors offering for 'reducing IR35 risk'. The orange boxes don't work.

Morning Northernladuk – I can see what you mean about how the article is written, though, to be fair to Contractor Weekly, it doesn’t mention insurance. Your point about using the word ‘relief’ is a fair one.

Thanks for letting me know about the website.

From a Yorkshire lass to a Yorkshire lad, let's not be too hard on ourselves, Yorkshire's a great place to come from! – have a lovely weekend 

Joanna

[northernladuk]

Morning Northernladuk – I can see what you mean about how the article is written, though, to be fair to Contractor Weekly, it doesn’t mention insurance. Your point about using the word ‘relief’ is a fair one.

Thanks for letting me know about the website.

From a Yorkshire lass to a Yorkshire lad, let's not be too hard on ourselves, Yorkshire's a great place to come from! – have a lovely weekend 

Joanna

On the same mail that advertised your offering was an article on whether or not insurance was claimable which may have added to the confustion about insurance. I certainly thought the OP was going to talk about that.

Have to say the amount of spin you put on your products puts me right off before I have even tried to understand it. We have to be so careful with so many products offering us 95% retention etc you just end up looking at the title and if it even appears slightly misleading I just bin it off. If it can't tell me what it does for me in the first paragraph I am out. I can't believe I am the only one that thinks that.