Churchill Knight & Boox clients being investigated as Managed Service Companies

[Guy Incognito]

Another edge case is the following. For the period under investigation, the MSC may pay out less than 50% of the fees to the worker(s). However, the goal, presumably, is that the remaining amounts are paid out eventually. At that point, the PSC may become an MSC if all other conditions are met because there is no particular timeframe in the legislation over which the qualifying conditions must be met. Thus, any payment made later on, including a payment made on winding up, would potentially trigger the legislation if 61B(1)(b) was the only condition not met previously.

I've just read this. Do you mean you'd have preferred to submit a less detailed and more generic appeal?

Probably.

[antuk]

Sorry for my ignorance but, why do you need a second appeal? I thought one appeal against the determination of the company being deemed as MSC was enough...

I think you need to appeal each tax year separately as they are being sent as separate determinations

[ritwolf]

I went with WTT for my initial appeal. Their fee was higher, but I thought a detailed appeal would help to change HMRC mind. Well, it didn't work like that and I also got a standard response that my appeal is valid and it stood over. Last week I have asked WTT that, would my initial payment cover the appeal required for new Reg 80 and NIC letters. They said I would need to pay £450 again. I don't think it's worth that amount as I don't think our appeal is even read by HMRC. I had joined DK after the initial appeal and probably will continue with him.

Sorry for my ignorance but, why do you need a second appeal? I thought one appeal against the determination of the company being deemed as MSC was enough...

[ritwolf]

I put together a very detailed appeal in the hope of having my case dropped.

I wish I had not as I was still stood over and now they have time to pay expensive lawyers to find a small chink in my armour and f$%k me over.

I've just read this. Do you mean you'd have preferred to submit a less detailed and more generic appeal?

[rdw1970]

They are already out of business (except for providing email support) and have moved the accounts of existing clients to another accountancy firm (which, if I'm not mistaken, is part of the same parent group). One could think the parent group has not lost all of the revenue previously coming from Boox.

Boox is owned by the App Accounting Group which moved their Boox clients to Limelight Accountancy which is owned by DNS Accountants, so no it's not the same parent company. The App Accounting Group also owns Square Accounting and VAT Works Ltd which (afaia) are not part of this investigation.

[jamesbrown]

The MSCP is NOT the party liable for the debt.

Not quite. It is not at the top of the tree, but the transfer of debt provisions are draconian and can reach the MSCP and even its directors, ultimately. The difference is that the MSCP is in the firing line for all clients deemed to be MSCs. Given the number of cases, there will be plenty where the MSC and its directors cannot pay, so the debt could be transferred down the chain to the MSCP.

[ritwolf]

According to the following article:

https://www.contractoruk.com/news/00...ll%20Knight%3F

The MSCP is NOT the party liable for the debt (or at least not liable in the first instance).

So, what's in it for Boox to not give up and defend themselves and prove HMRC wrong? They are already out of business (except for providing email support) and have moved the accounts of existing clients to another accountancy firm (which, if I'm not mistaken, is part of the same parent group). One could think the parent group has not lost all of the revenue previously coming from Boox.

I see CK is still providing services and managed to raise funds so understandibly they'd want to continue fighting.

But for those who were with Boox, what happens when you appeal? Is the case stopped until Boox gets a ruling in court, or can HMRC regardless reject your appeal? And if rejected, is there anything else we can do if disagree with the outcome?

[Fred Bloggs]

What sorts of proofs are valuable?

For example:

• registered company to my address?
• applied for UTR number for my company myself?
• opened myself and solely had access to multiple bank accounts?
• opened saving account for my company myself?
• registered domains for my company myself?
• decided on salary and one-off dividends myself?
• collected expenses myself?
• issued invoices to clients myself?
• paid tax, vat, expenses, salary, dividends myself?
• managed clients myself?
• kept money in the company for rainy days?

Are these above of any useful value for appeal? Are there any other things i could add but i don't remember from the top of my head? Should these proofs above be specific to a tax year in determination or can be more general? My goal is to collect a list of proofs one can come up with to have a better chance at appeal.

There's no one piece of proof available. Gather together all that and as much more that you can think of. Things like emails telling the accountant how much salary you've decided to take. Dividend declaration meeting notes where you decide what the dividend is. Website hosting contract in the company name. Company credit card statement. Business cards. Anything and everything no matter how seemingly trivial. It all has to paint a picture of you running a business. No one thing on it's own can do that.

[gikap]

As stated many times in this thread. You need to gather all the proof you have that you were running the company, all aspects of it. You need proof that Boox or CK were not involved in the actual running of the company. Collect together everything that clearly shows you made all the decisions. (Assimung that's what did actually happen, of course).

What sorts of proofs are valuable?

For example:

• registered company to my address?
• applied for UTR number for my company myself?
• opened myself and solely had access to multiple bank accounts?
• opened saving account for my company myself?
• registered domains for my company myself?
• decided on salary and one-off dividends myself?
• collected expenses myself?
• issued invoices to clients myself?
• paid tax, vat, expenses, salary, dividends myself?
• managed clients myself?
• kept money in the company for rainy days?

Are these above of any useful value for appeal? Are there any other things i could add but i don't remember from the top of my head? Should these proofs above be specific to a tax year in determination or can be more general? My goal is to collect a list of proofs one can come up with to have a better chance at appeal.

[Fred Bloggs]

Thank you for your answer



Is there any hope for those of us who were just a someone working via our own limited company for a single client at a time and have used Boox or CK just for accounting?

As stated many times in this thread. You need to gather all the proof you have that you were running the company, all aspects of it. You need proof that Boox or CK were not involved in the actual running of the company. Collect together everything that clearly shows you made all the decisions. (Assimung that's what did actually happen, of course).