Originally posted by northernladuk
View Post
- 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!
How does being inside IR35 work if you have staff?
Collapse
X
-
Down with racism. Long live miscegenation! -
It does illustrate the absurdity of IR35. When you have multiple fee-earners working for you, but no guarantee that they will be constantly fee-earning, there's the risk that IR35 could force you to pay their salaries, at times, out of funds on which you are personally taxed, and which you will never receive. And of course, they also would be taxed on those particular funds.
This is unlikely to happen now but it certainly could have happened in my first two years if someone had decided that my contracts should be inside IR35, because my own contracts were indeed subsidising salaries I was paying. And some of those contracts were borderline. I kept a printout of the BET in case I was ever challenged because, unlike most contractors, those who actually employ people (beyond paying the Mrs for bookkeeping) were helped by the BET. It had been withdrawn by then but I was advised that a BET showing me clearly in business for myself would be helpful if HMRC ever came calling.
It's absurd to argue that someone who is really employing people and using the proceeds of his contract to pay them is in hidden employment, whatever the working practices. But then, IR35 is stupid anyway.
Is anyone at IPSE asking Tory leadership candidates to commit to revisit Brown's baby?Comment
-
Originally posted by NotAllThere View PostIt wasn't new then - all these discussions were had over the original IR35 first formulated in 1999.'CUK forum personality of 2011 - Winner - Yes really!!!!Comment
-
I recall the original Mrs Mopp example from way back when where it's morally OK to send skivvys to do the work for you but woe betide you should you ever deign to get your own hands dirty. Appalling....my quagmire of greed....my cesspit of laziness and unfairness....all I am doing is sticking two fingers up at nurses, doctors and other hard working employed professionals...
Comment
-
Originally posted by WordIsBond View PostIt does illustrate the absurdity of IR35. When you have multiple fee-earners working for you, but no guarantee that they will be constantly fee-earning, there's the risk that IR35 could force you to pay their salaries, at times, out of funds on which you are personally taxed, and which you will never receive. And of course, they also would be taxed on those particular funds.
This is unlikely to happen now but it certainly could have happened in my first two years if someone had decided that my contracts should be inside IR35, because my own contracts were indeed subsidising salaries I was paying. And some of those contracts were borderline. I kept a printout of the BET in case I was ever challenged because, unlike most contractors, those who actually employ people (beyond paying the Mrs for bookkeeping) were helped by the BET. It had been withdrawn by then but I was advised that a BET showing me clearly in business for myself would be helpful if HMRC ever came calling.
It's absurd to argue that someone who is really employing people and using the proceeds of his contract to pay them is in hidden employment, whatever the working practices. But then, IR35 is stupid anyway.
Is anyone at IPSE asking Tory leadership candidates to commit to revisit Brown's baby?
don't hold your breath!Comment
-
Redundancy
Originally posted by Jakes Daddy View PostI am contracting for a large bank via an agency. As with most I'm bracing myself for the new rules in April 2020 and trying to understand any potential impact as best I can. I don't hold much confidence in the client and agency being particularly contractor friendly, especially given another bank's recent position on the matter (HSBC), so am bracing myself for a worst case scenario Inside IR35 decision
At the moment, the model is well understood. From an invoice, we take off business expenses such as salary, pension contributions, accountancy fees etc. What's left is the gross profit. 20% of that goes to corporation tax, leaving net profit which can be paid as dividend. Easy.
As I understand it, if caught by IR35 we get a 5% business expenses allowance, and the rest is assumed to be personal income and will be taxed as such by the agency. So 95% of my invoice will be treated as if it is personal income and will be taxed at source. That's OK if your limited co only employs you (well, it's not, but that's another argument), but what happens if you have staff costs other than your own?
In my case I employ a part time office administrator on a 1 day a week basis. I pay her a small salary and pension contributions.
In the Inside IR35 model, my need for an office admin doesn't change, so I still need to employ her and pay her. But the company income that I would be paying her from would already have been taxed on the incorrect assumption that all of that income is mine.
Are there provisions in the Inside IR35 rules to cover staff costs like this? How is it meant to work?Comment
-
Originally posted by Really Not Real View PostWell, I employ the wife (for accountancy, office admin, etc.) and have done so for the last 8 years.According to her T&C's (yes she really has them!)
I guess I'll just have to put her on a rehire-redundancy-rehire-redundancy loop..'CUK forum personality of 2011 - Winner - Yes really!!!!Comment
-
Originally posted by northernladuk View PostAt a market rate for the time and level of her duties I'm sure. That's nice but it's a contract she needs. Not T&Cs.
Might need to brush up on the laws around redundancy there fella.- Market rate absolutely.
- T&C's are contained inside something commonly called a contract.
- An element of humour re: rehiring after redundancy, but yes I'm already suitably brushed up on redundancy (i.e. there is no restriction on re-employing somebody [the same person] who has been made redundant) are you?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Really Not Real View Post- Market rate absolutely.
- T&C's are contained inside something commonly called a contract.
- An element of humour re: rehiring after redundancy, but yes I'm already suitably brushed up on redundancy (i.e. there is no restriction on re-employing somebody [the same person] who has been made redundant) are you?
Comment
-
Correct in that the £30k is not an allowance but rather a limit provided certain conditions are met.
For example, paying somebody £5k a year for 2 years and then a £30k redundancy, would almost certainly not qualify the £30k for relief.Best Forum Adviser & Forum Personality of the Year 2018.
(No, me neither).Comment
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Streamline Your Retirement with iSIPP: A Solution for Contractor Pensions Sep 1 09:13
- Making the most of pension lump sums: overview for contractors Sep 1 08:36
- Umbrella company tribunal cases are opening up; are your wages subject to unlawful deductions, too? Aug 31 08:38
- Contractors, relabelling 'labour' as 'services' to appear 'fully contracted out' won't dupe IR35 inspectors Aug 31 08:30
- How often does HMRC check tax returns? Aug 30 08:27
- Work-life balance as an IT contractor: 5 top tips from a tech recruiter Aug 30 08:20
- Autumn Statement 2023 tipped to prioritise mental health, in a boost for UK workplaces Aug 29 08:33
- Final reminder for contractors to respond to the umbrella consultation (closing today) Aug 29 08:09
- Top 5 most in demand cyber security contract roles Aug 25 08:38
- Changes to the right to request flexible working are incoming, but how will contractors be affected? Aug 24 08:25
Comment