• 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.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Murray Group decision 5th July

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

    #91
    Originally posted by jbryce View Post
    So, for the sake of my sanity,...

    I worked for ClientCo who, via a tortuous route, saw X cash deposited in my account.
    Who is liable for the tax?
    Me as the Employee?
    ClientCo as the Employer?
    The loan company? (who didn't even ask me to sign loan documents until after payments were made)

    Or - are we all liable?
    It could be employer or loan company. However it depends on the scheme.

    A bigger concern is the loan company asking for their money back.

    MP already asked for 10% back.

    Comment


      #92
      Originally posted by Iliketax View Post
      Sure.

      1. HMRC may not be get income tax from the borrower if the employer should have operated PAYE. But I don't do that for a living.
      2. The decision has no practical impact for the current disguised remuneration rules or for the expected April 2019 rules.
      Thanks - so now the dust is settling, it's looking like the landscape (for contractors) is much the same as it was before the judgement. Not much better, not much worse.

      Comment


        #93
        Originally posted by BrilloPad View Post
        It could be employer or loan company. However it depends on the scheme.

        A bigger concern is the loan company asking for their money back.

        MP already asked for 10% back.
        Is that really a bigger concern. I realise it may be concerning to many people, but in a practical sense, should people be that worried.

        Won't the Limitation Act mean that the debt is unenforceable - which is kind of HMRC's point about these being "loans".

        Comment


          #94
          Originally posted by centurian View Post
          Is that really a bigger concern. I realise it may be concerning to many people, but in a practical sense, should people be that worried.

          Won't the Limitation Act mean that the debt is unenforceable - which is kind of HMRC's point about these being "loans".
          I can't find the link but me and BP discussed this a short while ago and the limitation act kicks in surprisingly late to the extent that its probably not started in many cases...
          merely at clientco for the entertainment

          Comment


            #95
            Originally posted by eek View Post
            I can't find the link but me and BP discussed this a short while ago and the limitation act kicks in surprisingly late to the extent that its probably not started in many cases...
            I think - but am not certain - that limitation clock only starts after an attempt is made to get payment. I.e. the event which triggers the debt.

            This is assuming there is no date for repayment and there is an "on demand" provision.

            Comment


              #96
              Originally posted by centurian View Post
              Is that really a bigger concern. I realise it may be concerning to many people, but in a practical sense, should people be that worried.

              Won't the Limitation Act mean that the debt is unenforceable - which is kind of HMRC's point about these being "loans".
              I suppose you can fight all the way to the Supreme court and get the loan declared a sham.

              Comment


                #97
                Originally posted by BrilloPad View Post
                I suppose you can fight all the way to the Supreme court and get the loan declared a sham.
                HMRC wants it to be a sham!
                No wait, they want the loan to be real!
                Ah, no probs - it can be a sham and real at the same time.

                Comment


                  #98
                  Originally posted by jbryce View Post
                  HMRC wants it to be a sham!
                  No wait, they want the loan to be real!
                  Ah, no probs - it can be a sham and real at the same time.
                  HMRC can instruct their puppet MPs to make it so. The courts already confirmed HMRC can make any law they want to.

                  Comment


                    #99
                    Originally posted by eek View Post
                    I can't find the link but me and BP discussed this a short while ago and the limitation act kicks in surprisingly late to the extent that its probably not started in many cases...
                    Yeah, I see the point...

                    Comment


                      Originally posted by jbryce View Post
                      HMRC wants it to be a sham!
                      No wait, they want the loan to be real!
                      Ah, no probs - it can be a sham and real at the same time.
                      But this is nothing new is it? Intermediaries legislation charges you corporation tax and VAT like a business. And NICs as an employer/employee too. I'm afraid the guys at HMRC and HMG get to make up whatever rules they like. Nothing new in that at all.
                      Public Service Posting by the BBC - Bloggs Bulls**t Corp.
                      Officially CUK certified - Thick as f**k.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X