New charge on outstanding disguised remuneration loans

[ChimpMaster]

https://www.gov.uk/government/public...technical-note

Makes for interesting reading in chapter 5, where HMRC appear to indicate that loans made at any time ever will be taxed for income/NICs, so long as they are "outstanding disguised remuneration loans".

I'm not sure how these loans work in practise but if you have been given one then I'm guessing it is reported every year on your tax return until it is paid off (if ever) and hence will always be an "outstanding" loan.

Scary stuff!

[webberg]

That note requires some very careful reading.

Being a pedant:

There is no place in a tax return to report outstanding loans

The proposed charge is a one off

Like I said tho, I suggest a careful reading, some thought, another reading and then step back and view the situation not just from a tax perspective.

[Not Losing Any Sleep]

That note requires some very careful reading.

Being a pedant:

There is no place in a tax return to report outstanding loans

The proposed charge is a one off

Like I said tho, I suggest a careful reading, some thought, another reading and then step back and view the situation not just from a tax perspective.

There will be a lot of work for the lawyers debating what is in Part 7A.

[webberg]

If I was a tax planner I'd be rubbing my hands in glee.

Once again I can see the usual suspects coming up with "solutions" here backed by "eminent QC" and "fully compliant" and yours for just 25% of the outstanding loan.

[ChimpMaster]

The point I was trying to make - and I may well have this wrong - is that it seems HMRC have entered their time machine again and changed history: they can now go back to any time they want and charge tax on these loans, no matter when they were issued, so long as they are still "outstanding" ...whatever that means.

[webberg]

It would be hard to disagree with that view.

I would also observe that IPSE is curiously silent on the major impact to contractors in this budget.

Of all the times that contractors need leadership and strength as a body it's NOW to fight this unjust proposal and there is nothing from the self proclaimed head of the profession.

[DotasScandal]

It would be hard to disagree with that view.
I would also observe that IPSE is curiously silent on the major impact to contractors in this budget.
Of all the times that contractors need leadership and strength as a body it's NOW to fight this unjust proposal and there is nothing from the self proclaimed head of the profession.

True. Their silence is deafening.

[LandRover]

True. Their silence is deafening.

All members need to email them and ask for their view.

[CDJ]

It would be hard to disagree with that view.

I would also observe that IPSE is curiously silent on the major impact to contractors in this budget.

Of all the times that contractors need leadership and strength as a body it's NOW to fight this unjust proposal and there is nothing from the self proclaimed head of the profession.

I gave up on IPSE when they started negotiating with HMRC about IR35 -when they were set up purely as an action group to get it repealed. Having said that, IPSE have never supported contractors that have used these schemes, so why would they comment on this piece of legislation?

Also, I don't think we can argue retrospectivity here (even though the effect is to bring past sums into taxation).. I think we are getting stung because of the very thing that made these schemes "work". The fact that the Loan is always outstanding. This is not the same as the poor BN66ers.

[Fred Bloggs]

As far as I recall, PCG/IPSE has never publicly had a view on tax avoidance schemes? I imagine the majority of the members would object if any resources were expended in that direction?