RTI - Service Comnapy Question

[IR35 Avoider]

I have checked with HMRC a couple of months ago and they said the latter - if you have operated IR35 (and made a deemed payment) then you should say yes to the question, otherwise it should be no.

Craig

So if I regard all my company income as caught by IR35, but there is no deemed payment because my actual salary and pension contributions have nullified any need for one, I should say no?

[Craig at Nixon Williams]

So if I regard all my company income as caught by IR35, but there is no deemed payment because my actual salary and pension contributions have nullified any need for one, I should say no?

If you regard the company income to be caught by IR35 then in my view you should answer yes to this question.

Craig

[blinko]

This is what the help file indicates...


A service company who has operated the Intermediaries legislation (sometimes known as IR35).

A service company is one which is set up to supply a worker's services to a client. There is no contract between the worker and the client. The contractual arrangements are between the company and the client, either directly or via another intermediary. The company is usually under the control of the worker and it derives its income wholly or mainly from the supply of the worker's personal services.

For example: John Smith is a software engineer. John is a director and shareholder of his own company, John Smith Software Ltd.

Company A contracts with John Smith Software Ltd to use the personal services of John as a programmer. All payments are made by Company A to John Smith Software Ltd. In this example John Smith Software Ltd is a 'service company'.

[DaveB]

This is what the help file indicates...


A service company who has operated the Intermediaries legislation (sometimes known as IR35).

A service company is one which is set up to supply a worker's services to a client. There is no contract between the worker and the client. The contractual arrangements are between the company and the client, either directly or via another intermediary. The company is usually under the control of the worker and it derives its income wholly or mainly from the supply of the worker's personal services.

For example: John Smith is a software engineer. John is a director and shareholder of his own company, John Smith Software Ltd.

Company A contracts with John Smith Software Ltd to use the personal services of John as a programmer. All payments are made by Company A to John Smith Software Ltd. In this example John Smith Software Ltd is a 'service company'.

Which is fine, except it doesn't explain what is meant by "operated the intermediaries legislation", although it does define HMRC's view of a service company.

Given Craig's earlier statement about the HMRC view I'm still going to answer No to this one as I've made no deemed payments.