• 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.

Crackdown on personal service companies could raise £400m in tax

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Crackdown on personal service companies could raise £400m in tax

    Crackdown on personal service companies could raise £400m in tax | Politics | The Guardian

    "Amid fears that business will complain of fresh regulations, the government is proposing that a consultant using a personal service company would be obliged to move on to the payroll if they work for a business for more than a month. Businesses, rather than the individual, would be responsible for overseeing the rules. An agency would be responsible if they provide consultants to businesses."

    "A government source said: “This is about fairness in the tax system. It is just not fair to have people in the same company doing the same jobs paying different levels of tax."

    #2
    Could be worse, we could be forced to sit on spikes

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by jamesbrown View Post
      "Amid fears that business will complain of fresh regulations, the government is proposing that a consultant using a personal service company would be obliged to move on to the payroll if they work for a business for more than a month. Businesses, rather than the individual, would be responsible for overseeing the rules. An agency would be responsible if they provide consultants to businesses."

      "A government source said: “This is about fairness in the tax system. It is just not fair to have people in the same company doing the same jobs paying different levels of tax."
      Aim, see toes fire!


      They really don't understand do they??
      "If you didn't do anything that wasn't good for you it would be a very dull life. What are you gonna do? Everything that is pleasant in life is dangerous."

      I want to see the hand of history on his collar.

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by tarbera View Post
        Could be worse, we could be forced to sit on spikes
        Yeah The article itself is a jumbled mess, but it's clearly pointing to a fundamental change, far beyond the T&S proposal. Gideon in "listening mode" at the CBI next week. Yeah, right.

        Comment


          #5
          When would this come in? Sounds utterly bonkers and even stupider than the ignorance already displayed in the T&S consultation doc.

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by Zero Liability View Post
            When would this come in? Sounds utterly bonkers and even stupider than the ignorance already displayed in the T&S consultation doc.
            All bets are off, assuming Nick Watt hasn't completely jumped the shark (and it is a pretty crap article). If they're considering something that stupid, they could consider a stupid timeframe too, although I'd still bet on April 2017 given how far reaching the impacts would be (including for gov't departments).

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by jamesbrown View Post
              All bets are off, assuming Nick Watt hasn't completely jumped the shark (and it is a pretty crap article). If they're considering something that stupid, they could consider a stupid timeframe too, although I'd still bet on April 2017 given how far reaching the impacts would be (including for gov't departments).
              I can't find anything else on it. I wonder if it's just poor reporting on the T&S consultation? Like you say, it's pretty vague and sparse on details.

              I hope you're right. Nothing like a bit of cheer to jumpstart the weekend, eh?

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by Zero Liability View Post
                I can't find anything else on it. I wonder if it's just poor reporting on the T&S consultation? Like you say, it's pretty vague and sparse on details.

                I hope you're right.
                It's the sort of thing that would've been briefed and the reference to "a month" and some other details aren't likely to have been made up. That said, it could be terrible reporting/briefing (it is a complicated area afterall), although I doubt it.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Whichever way you look at it, contracting as we know it is ****ed. Its not a question of 'if,' it just a question of 'when.'
                  I couldn't give two fornicators! Yes, really!

                  Comment


                    #10
                    It'd "raise" a purely speculative £400m and cost both businesses and the govt how much? Best to wait on a more reliable source, I guess.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X