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!
Originally posted by LisaContractorUmbrellaView Post
Beg your pardon your Cojakness missed that on their site - think I was blinded by tears after cracking up at the 'HMRC approved' '90% take home'
Oh no, you read too much into their very carefully worded statement. It states that HMRC recognises that they are not a tax avoidance scheme. That isn't the same as being approved (although I'm sure that TS won't stop you from thinking that they're the same thing).
As I said in my 1st post, I'd get written proof that this is the case. It won't stop HMRC from coming to get you, but it might make you feel better if the lawyers get involved...
"I can put any old tat in my sig, put quotes around it and attribute to someone of whom I've heard, to make it sound true."
- Voltaire/Benjamin Franklin/Anne Frank...
Oh no, you read too much into their very carefully worded statement. It states that HMRC recognises that they are not a tax avoidance scheme. That isn't the same as being approved (although I'm sure that TS won't stop you from thinking that they're the same thing).
As I said in my 1st post, I'd get written proof that this is the case. It won't stop HMRC from coming to get you, but it might make you feel better if the lawyers get involved...
Can't see that they would get anything other than they haven't declared the scheme to HMRC through DOTAS because their QC doesn't think they have to - as you rightly say, very different from 'approved' - can't get over the 90% though - although saying that I did see one the other day at 92.5%
To the unknowing, you can see how easily it is to get sucked in though. Insurance, clever QC's, 'approved' by HMRC, tested and won in court etc.... For many, the first time they know there's a problem is when the brown envelopes start dropping on the doormat.
Not that I'm saying this scheme is anything like that of course - please don't sue me.
To the unknowing, you can see how easily it is to get sucked in though. Insurance, clever QC's, 'approved' by HMRC, tested and won in court etc.... For many, the first time they know there's a problem is when the brown envelopes start dropping on the doormat.
Not that I'm saying this scheme is anything like that of course - please don't sue me.
As another poster said. The company has been established only a couple of years and does not appear to have any funds in the the accounts.
Beats me why any contractor would want to trust their hard earned cash to a company of such little visible substance without some very tangible guarantees in return.
best advice I can give is - DO NOT TOUCH ANY SCHEME WITH A BARGE POLL. It's not worth the hassle for what may happen later.
Even if you think you are operating within the law, HMRC can, and have, come along later and used retrospective law changes to catch people. See here if you don't believe me:
best advice I can give is - DO NOT TOUCH ANY SCHEME WITH A BARGE POLL. It's not worth the hassle for what may happen later.
Even if you think you are operating within the law, HMRC can, and have, come along later and used retrospective law changes to catch people. See here if you don't believe me:
Comment