Agency stipulating sole director ownership ltd

[SteelyDan]

Right, Im back in the saddle again....

NCOTBAP?

[SRR]

Don't worry I'm happy to explain to the end client why your awkwardness means I am unable to work with them .

5 minutes later - I believe they lawyers are investigating whether your failure to provide the promised resource is significant enough to warrant a breach in contract which will allow them to find another agency through which I can work...

Would love to hear the excuse that they give for me no longer being available for the role, fully don't expect it to represent the truth of what actually happened. I know a couple of people who work at the end client already so I'll be mentioning it to them...

[BolshieBastard]

NCOTBAP?

No. Topping up the retirement pot!

[Andy Hallett]

Bolshie. There are probably two bits of legislation that the 'compliance team' will be referencing to get to this decision, namely MSC and Onshore Intermediaries.

The agency will be protecting their position as there are transfer of debt provisions if you don't pay up.

At this point the transfer of debt provision is largely untested as you are just a single contractor the commercial risk for a larger agency is minimal.

In your example, we'd probably ask a few more questions and wave it through.

[RoastedSlopes]

Bolshie. There are probably two bits of legislation that the 'compliance team' will be referencing to get to this decision, namely MSC and Onshore Intermediaries.

The agency will be protecting their position as there are transfer of debt provisions if you don't pay up.

At this point the transfer of debt provision is largely untested as you are just a single contractor the commercial risk for a larger agency is minimal.

In your example, we'd probably ask a few more questions and wave it through.

Sorry, so are you saying that agencies are now looking to only employ freelancers who have a limited company and a single director/shareholders?

Can you explain the reasons in more detail please?

[Andy Hallett]

I can't speak for every agency, but my suspicion here is that they want to be sure the OP is operating a proper PSC. To do this they will look for evidence to support this, eg directorships and shareholding.

If there were taxation recovery issues down the line and it could be argued that it wasn't a PSC then the agency would have a [theoretical] liability.

[normalbloke]

I can't speak for every agency, but my suspicion here is that they want to be sure the OP is operating a proper PSC. To do this they will look for evidence to support this, eg directorships and shareholding.

If there were taxation recovery issues down the line and it could be argued that it wasn't a PSC then the agency would have a [theoretical] liability.

What's that then? Didn't think there was a legal definition of a 'PSC' . Verifying a certificate of incorporation isn't that difficult....

[meridian]

I can't speak for every agency, but my suspicion here is that they want to be sure the OP is operating a proper PSC. To do this they will look for evidence to support this, eg directorships and shareholding.

If there were taxation recovery issues down the line and it could be argued that it wasn't a PSC then the agency would have a [theoretical] liability.

Interesting, Andy. Given that HMRC has deliberately left vague the exact definition of a PSC, what do you consider a "proper" PSC to be, and under what legislation are you defining it? And what makes another structure not "proper"?

[BolshieBastard]

Sorry, so are you saying that agencies are now looking to only employ freelancers who have a limited company and a single director/shareholders?

Can you explain the reasons in more detail please?

That's how I read Andy's comments too (Thanks Andy).

Obviously Im not up to speed on any changes in legislation on PSC's but I havent seen anything out there to suggest everyone's got to switch to single shareholder PSC either so still dont get this single shareholder 'requirement.'

Still, they've issued the contract so they arent set in stone.

[psychocandy]

Yes I dont understand how having one director is proof of being a PSC.

Surely though they are going to find a lot of us with two directors? Seems standard agency-got-no-idea again.

I certainly wouldnt change MY company setup for this. Would cost too much for starters.

At the moment, mrs gets £32K worth of dividends. If I was now unable to do this, it'd be £32K more I'd have to pay at 40%.

Too dull to work that out (17% of the extra?). About £5000 extra tax.
So I reckon £9000 or so extra income needed. £40 per day extra needed.
Sums are probably crap.

Still probably wouldn't do it. Even if you did change the company set up just for this gig, would you really want to change it all back a few months down the line? I've always understood that arsing about with the shareholdings can be a bit of a red flag.