RBS, contractors and IR35

[JohntheBike]

Point out all you want but if it's totally irrelevant then you are just wasting everyone's time.

only you seem to think its irrelevant. No one else has made any comment. And as far as notifications are concerned, I've received many supporting my points of view, but only a few which don't and all those are from you. So, you are in a majority of one.

[webberg]

Can I suggest a couple of things here please?

It seems to me that northernladuk and John the Bike have some form of spat going on for reasons I'm not aware of nor care to be aware of. It's none of my business.

Can I request however that it's taken to a separate thread as otherwise it distracts and confuses a debate in which we all understand there are no right or wrong questions, answers, lessons from the past, thoughts on the future.

Thank you.

[northernladuk]

Can I suggest a couple of things here please?

It seems to me that northernladuk and John the Bike have some form of spat going on for reasons I'm not aware of nor care to be aware of. It's none of my business.

Can I request however that it's taken to a separate thread as otherwise it distracts and confuses a debate in which we all understand there are no right or wrong questions, answers, lessons from the past, thoughts on the future.

Thank you.

That's one suggestion, what about the others?

[JohntheBike]

Can I suggest a couple of things here please?

It seems to me that northernladuk and John the Bike have some form of spat going on for reasons I'm not aware of nor care to be aware of. It's none of my business.

Can I request however that it's taken to a separate thread as otherwise it distracts and confuses a debate in which we all understand there are no right or wrong questions, answers, lessons from the past, thoughts on the future.

Thank you.

well, I'm trying to engage sensibly with the discussions, but I suffer criticism at every turn from Northernladuk. Private notifications to me are on the whole supportive of my position, and the only dissenting voice is Northernladuk. So do you wish to comment on his latest criticisms?

My point was that if any legislation causes high profile issues, like the UC and pensions for high paid earners, then HMG is obliged to react. I see the same about IR35. If it becomes an issue, e.g. increasing court cases, then there is just an outside chance that things will change.

So would you like to comment?

[webberg]

That's one suggestion, what about the others?

I decided the second was unprofessional.

[webberg]

well, I'm trying to engage sensibly with the discussions, but I suffer criticism at every turn from Northernladuk. Private notifications to me are on the whole supportive of my position, and the only dissenting voice is Northernladuk. So do you wish to comment on his latest criticisms?

My point was that if any legislation causes high profile issues, like the UC and pensions for high paid earners, then HMG is obliged to react. I see the same about IR35. If it becomes an issue, e.g. increasing court cases, then there is just an outside chance that things will change.

So would you like to comment?

No I do not wish to comment on personal comments passed between you.

My view on IR35 is simple.

It's here to stay; it will be extended further; we will see self employment abolished for all but the lowest earners.

This is not as a result of high profile cases, high earners or cases going to Court.

It's a result of simple arithmetic driving Government policy.

The choice is between collecting £x from self employed contractors at a cost of £y, net £z; or making somebody else collect the tax at their cost, reducing £y and increasing £z.

HMRC has won the PR war in painting all contractors as "tax avoiders" and therefore can do pretty much anything they like in increasing £z.

Their only major error to date has been the loan charge.

[oliverson]

No I do not wish to comment on personal comments passed between you.

My view on IR35 is simple.

It's here to stay; it will be extended further; we will see self employment abolished for all but the lowest earners.

This is not as a result of high profile cases, high earners or cases going to Court.

It's a result of simple arithmetic driving Government policy.

The choice is between collecting £x from self employed contractors at a cost of £y, net £z; or making somebody else collect the tax at their cost, reducing £y and increasing £z.

HMRC has won the PR war in painting all contractors as "tax avoiders" and therefore can do pretty much anything they like in increasing £z.

Their only major error to date has been the loan charge.

I've been looking at moving my operations to Spain and it seems most contractors set up as 'autonomos' in which they pay a certain amount per month and are entitled to healthcare, etc, and payment is received from clients 'after' tax has already been deducted. You may well be right in suggesting a similar approach might happen here. But for me, the easy way to kill contracting is just to increase the dividend tax to something like 20%. Job done.

[JohntheBike]

No I do not wish to comment on personal comments passed between you.

My view on IR35 is simple.

It's here to stay; it will be extended further; we will see self employment abolished for all but the lowest earners.

This is not as a result of high profile cases, high earners or cases going to Court.

It's a result of simple arithmetic driving Government policy.

The choice is between collecting £x from self employed contractors at a cost of £y, net £z; or making somebody else collect the tax at their cost, reducing £y and increasing £z.

HMRC has won the PR war in painting all contractors as "tax avoiders" and therefore can do pretty much anything they like in increasing £z.

Their only major error to date has been the loan charge.

For some reason that I can only speculate on, Northernladuk has taken it upon himself to criticise almost every post that I've made. Given his very vociferous personal attacks on me and the abuse that he dishes out, which would have resulted in his being banned in another place, I can only suspect that he is afraid of what I can do, which leads me to believe that he is an HMRC mole.

[webberg]

For some reason that I can only speculate on, Northernladuk has taken it upon himself to criticise almost every post that I've made. Given his very vociferous personal attacks on me and the abuse that he dishes out, which would have resulted in his being banned in another place, I can only suspect that he is afraid of what I can do, which leads me to believe that he is an HMRC mole.

You are entitled to that view of course and he is entitled to disagree.

However, this thread is not a vehicle for personal spats or points scoring and I'd respectfully request that you both take it elsewhere please?

[webberg]

I've been looking at moving my operations to Spain and it seems most contractors set up as 'autonomos' in which they pay a certain amount per month and are entitled to healthcare, etc, and payment is received from clients 'after' tax has already been deducted. You may well be right in suggesting a similar approach might happen here. But for me, the easy way to kill contracting is just to increase the dividend tax to something like 20%. Job done.

I agree it seems simple and sensible. I believe France has something not a million miles away.

In the UK, I cannot see the Government funding that sort of idea unless it becomes a statutory requirement and if that is the route, then simpler (i.e. cheaper) options are available.

It may be that there is a place for a scheme whereby contractors would be able to lodge funds equal(ish) to the possible tax arising from a future enquiry, until that time limit has expired when they are returned.

I can see all sorts of hurdles to overcome there though, starting with who would a contractor actually trust to hold the money and have it available in the event of a claim.