Has anybody here furloughed themselves yet?

[simes]

Double post

[jamesbrown]

Try again.

"However, all employers are eligible to claim under the scheme and the government recognises different businesses will face different impacts from coronavirus"

You don't seem to get it. Big profitable companies like CBRE, American law firms etc are furloughing employees because they are legally entitled too.

Don't try spread misinformation that a small contractor should be relying on their own reserves when multinational companies are legally accepting the handouts.

Try again.

It's quite straightforward for a company like EasyJet to demonstrate that they're unable to retain their enormous workforce under current circumstances.

It will be extremely difficult for an owner-director with 90k reserves and a workforce that is paid 600 PCM to show that they're unable to retain their workforce for, oh I don't know, 150 fecking months!

The disinformation is all yours.

[jamed]

Ignoring the usual cretin who focuses on the irrelevant, many thanks for the above.

Can I just restate that, as I think I see it, MyCo IS still earning through the 2 x rentals. In effect, MyCo is therefore still 'working' and earning, and offering services.

For it to not be working and earning would mean both the rentals would have to stop paying.

Right / wrong, in peoples' opinions?

As for the 'looking for work', and from this link, I am looking at these words.

Check if you can claim for your employees' wages through the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme - GOV.UK

"Where furloughed directors need to carry out particular duties to fulfil the statutory obligations they owe to their company, they may do so provided they do no more than would reasonably be judged necessary for that purpose, i.e. they should not do work of a kind they would carry out in normal circumstances to generate commercial revenue or provides services to or on behalf of their company."

Looking at Jobserve and applying and (maybe) taking interviews would be just that - generating.

From my understanding is you can still apply even if you are generating income. Many companies are still making money in this time, although less than usual, but they are able to received the handout. Property companies like CBRE are still receiving rent and other income sources but are still able to furlough employees.

There seems to be a number of ways at looking at what constitutes "work". The one argument is that going for an interview is in the shoes of the "employee" and only when you received the contract does the "director" decide if he should sign or not. I think we are probably looking at it too technically anyway. But if it was an intereview for a permanent or inside 35 gig then it is a separate venture to your limited company and you could probably get a perm job and still be furloughed, technically. Although this might be pushing the limit.

[jamed]

Try again.

It's quite straightforward for a company like EasyJet to demonstrate that they're unable to retain their enormous workforce under current circumstances.

It will be extremely difficult for an owner-director with 90k reserves and a workforce that is paid 600 PCM to show that they're unable to retain their workforce for, oh I don't know, 150 fecking months!

The disinformation is all yours.

Last try.

"However, all employers are eligible to claim under the scheme and the government recognises different businesses will face different impacts from coronavirus."

You are spreading disinformation by making it seem like there is a reserve test to perform before being eligible to apply for the CJRS. There is no such thing.

[jamesbrown]

Last try.

"However, all employers are eligible to claim under the scheme and the government recognises different businesses will face different impacts from coronavirus."

Sure, there are no sectoral or size exclusions for a claim. That is blindingly obvious.

Last try:

If you cannot maintain your current workforce because your operations have been severely affected by coronavirus (COVID-19)

How would you answer this when asked?

FWIW, I think HMG will be extremely lenient about any claims that are in the vicinity of legitimate; that is what your quote is aiming to convey, as well as stating that there are no specific exclusions. For anyone that demonstrably doesn't need the scheme, however, I wouldn't touch it until I had extra guidance to say "actually, you can claim even if you can maintain your current workforce", contrary to what the current guidance actually says.

[simes]

Thanks again chaps.

[jamed]

Sure, there are no sectoral or size exclusions for a claim. That is blindingly obvious.

Last try:



How would you answer this when asked?

FWIW, I think HMG will be extremely lenient about any claims that are in the vicinity of legitimate; that is what your quote is aiming to convey, as well as stating that there are no specific exclusions. For anyone that demonstrably doesn't need the scheme, however, I wouldn't touch it until I had extra guidance to say "actually, you can claim even if you can maintain your current workforce", contrary to what the current guidance actually says.

It might make more sense if I fill in the full quote as I see it was misunderstood by you above referring to size and sector. Read the below bolded part of it. You will see they state the scheme is designed for affected employers due to covid BUT is available to all employers irrespective. In other words any company can use it, despite the fact they may have millions in reserves. Basically they realised it would be too complex and troublesome if they had to come up with a profitability/reserve test first.

"This is a temporary scheme in place for 4 months starting from 1 March 2020, but it may be extended if necessary and employers can use this scheme anytime during this period. It is designed to help employers whose operations have been severely affected by coronavirus (COVID-19) to retain their employees and protect the UK economy. However, all employers are eligible to claim under the scheme and the government recognises different businesses will face different impacts from coronavirus."

[OneManBand]

It might make more sense if I fill in the full quote as I see it was misunderstood by you above referring to size and sector. Read the below bolded part of it. You will see they state the scheme is designed for affected employers due to covid BUT is available to all employers irrespective. In other words any company can use it, despite the fact they may have millions in reserves. Basically they realised it would be too complex and troublesome if they had to come up with a profitability/reserve test first.

"This is a temporary scheme in place for 4 months starting from 1 March 2020, but it may be extended if necessary and employers can use this scheme anytime during this period. It is designed to help employers whose operations have been severely affected by coronavirus (COVID-19) to retain their employees and protect the UK economy. However, all employers are eligible to claim under the scheme and the government recognises different businesses will face different impacts from coronavirus."

I'm calling game, set and match.

[simes]

To clear this up, and having spoken with an HMRC agent, he says I am not entitled.

The rent was the binder.

[oliverson]

To clear this up, and having spoken with an HMRC agent, he says I am not entitled.

The rent was the binder.

and that's just his 'opinion'. Did you ask him to point you to the area of guidance where it said you weren't entitled?