- 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!
Reply to: Creditors Voluntary Liquidation
Collapse
You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
- You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
- You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
- If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.
Logging in...
Previously on "Creditors Voluntary Liquidation"
Collapse
-
Originally posted by Contreras View PostI do wonder though, if the OP can manage to repay the loan sufficiently for the company to meet its CT bill (and liquidators fee), willl HMRC (and the liquidator) go away happy and the personal taxation aspects become glossed over?
ExMrsBp1 works for tax department. Once someone was due a £16 rebate. They vowed not to let them get it back until they had spent £500 in accountants fees.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by tractor View PostYou need to read and understand the link I posted above. CT/Other creditors money is not yours to speculate with, however confident you feel about it. HMRC might argue that even though the tax due date had not yet passed, you could and perhaps should have paid the tax up earlier.
In any event we are not talking about CT used for further investment, we are discussing a specific situation where dividends were declared and taken illegally.
I was merely pointing out that an inablity to pay CT does not mean that previous dividends were unauthorised and can be reclaimed (I accept that it is often the case they were paid improperly but it is not a given).
In this particular case it is completely unknown what - if any - reserves were available for distribution. Yes it is likely it was nil. But that is not a certainty. To know that needs sight of all the accounts for all the periods in question.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by ASB View PostActually no. It is if you don't have the distributable reserves.
Contingent liabilities need to be included in these but being unable to pay CT does not of itself make the dividends unauthorised.
(However it does amount to much the same thing).
Consider.
Year 1 I make a nice profit, pay a nice dividend (the CT is allowed for; not yet paid because it is not due).
Year 2 I decide to buy a load of widgets. So many that I spend the CT money. Unfortunately the widget market collapses and I go bust. The CT on the loss is of course calculated and offset. But there remains a shortfall.
Does this make the dividends "illegal". No.
It makes me a damn idiot, it might make me in breach of fiduciary duties as a director. (Arguable, if I can show reasonable expectation of selling the widgets etc I may be ok).
Certainly the extent by which the "divdends" the op took exceed the reserves will (should) be classed as a loan, but this may be a lower sum that the total.
In any event we are not talking about CT used for further investment, we are discussing a specific situation where dividends were declared and taken illegally.Last edited by tractor; 26 June 2015, 10:50.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by SimonMac View PostBut if you don't have teh CT to cover the dividends they will be declared illegal
Contingent liabilities need to be included in these but being unable to pay CT does not of itself make the dividends unauthorised.
(However it does amount to much the same thing).
Consider.
Year 1 I make a nice profit, pay a nice dividend (the CT is allowed for; not yet paid because it is not due).
Year 2 I decide to buy a load of widgets. So many that I spend the CT money. Unfortunately the widget market collapses and I go bust. The CT on the loss is of course calculated and offset. But there remains a shortfall.
Does this make the dividends "illegal". No.
It makes me a damn idiot, it might make me in breach of fiduciary duties as a director. (Arguable, if I can show reasonable expectation of selling the widgets etc I may be ok).
Certainly the extent by which the "divdends" the op took exceed the reserves will (should) be classed as a loan, but this may be a lower sum that the total.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by TheFaQQer View PostI stand corrected.
It would be converted to a loan with BIK implications that would attract additional taxes that need to be paid by the individual instead.
I do wonder though, if the OP can manage to repay the loan sufficiently for the company to meet its CT bill (and liquidators fee), willl HMRC (and the liquidator) go away happy and the personal taxation aspects become glossed over?
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Contreras View PostThe dividend was used to cancel a loan, so (unless I missed a crucial point buried in the thread somewhere) therefore no cash transfer and if re-assessed it could not be deemed salary.
It would be converted to a loan with BIK implications that would attract additional taxes that need to be paid by the individual instead.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by tractor View PostIt seems there are enough gullible idiots around to make this a distinct possibility. You could start with all those who come here for advice and spend the next 12 pages arguing about it
Leave a comment:
-
......
Originally posted by Contreras View PostThe dividend was used to cancel a loan, so (unless I missed a crucial point buried in the thread somewhere) therefore no cash transfer and if re-assessed it could not be deemed salary.
Agreed. If the dividend were reversed then technically the company is solvent again, albeit without the "cash at hand" needed to meet its tax bill.
Separate legal entities yes, but HMRC would be entitled to call in the director's loan directly anyway.
Where a dividend is paid and it is unlawful in whole or in part and the recipient knew or had reasonable grounds to believe that it was unlawful then that shareholder holds the dividend (or part) as constructive trustee in accordance with the principles stated by Dillon L J in Precision Dippings Ltd v Precision Dippings Marketing Ltd [1986] 1 Ch at page 457. Such a dividend (or part) is void for the purposes of both the IT charge on distributions under ITTOIA05/S383 and the long abolished ACT charge under ICTA88/S14. The company has not made a distribution as a matter of company law, and so the dividend does not form part of the recipient's income for tax purposes. The company has not parted with title to the sum that it purported to distribute, which as a consequence remains part of its assets under a constructive trust (see also Ridge Securities Ltd v CIR (1964) 44TC373). Where the company concerned is a close company, it is regarded as having made a loan to the shareholder by virtue of CTA10/S455(1), thereby triggering a charge under CTA10/S455(2). Relief would however be available under CTA10/S458 where the dividend is repaid to the company. That repayment might be by cash or cheque, or by a suitable entry in the loan account.
It is the Insolvency Practitioner's responsibility to reverse the dividend payment and convert it to a loan.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by TheFaQQer View PostIf the dividends were illegal, then you'll need to get HMRC to re-open your self assessment so you can correct them. I'd guess that they would be reclassified as income, so you'll need to make sure the correct amount of NICs and PAYE is deducted.
Originally posted by meridian View PostThe company is insolvent because dividends in excess of available reserves were taken. If these illegal dividends are reversed, then the directors owe the company money, and the liquidators can chase the directors to repay enough money to the company to repay the tax debt.
Originally posted by meridian View PostI agree, that's why I said "repay money to the company", so the company can repay the CT. Separate legal entities.
Where the OP has gone wrong imo (apart from paying illegal dividends) is in getting a liquidator involved. Depending on how aggressive they are they may chase him, or they may drop it.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by MercladUK View PostCT is a company tax, not a personal tax.
Directors Loan and/or Illegal dividend payments are different.
You stated he will have to pay CT over 3 years, this is incorrect. The company pays CT and it is insolvent.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by BrilloPad View PostDon't be such a spoilsport. I am going to market the scheme. These time next year I'll be a millionaire....
Leave a comment:
-
.....
Originally posted by BrilloPad View PostDon't be such a spoilsport. I am going to market the scheme. These time next year I'll be a millionaire....
Leave a 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
Leave a comment: