Reply to: Moving to limited?

[missinggreenfields]

Going limited and not taking maximum advantage of the allowances is when you will not maximise the advantage. Read this on all the possible allowances and make sure you take advantage: More tax "smart" crap linkage

Good point, well made.

[northernladuk]

Honestly I am not sure but it didn't look like it had any, just a one month notice however if it did have one it seems they never found out and my acquaintance was lucky.

Bull or not know I just stated the facts.

Facts? You just admitted you didn't know so I don't believe there was a single fact. You stated a load of made up bollocks. Not facts.

[LondonManc]

They say every man's got a book in them, I see potential for a series here

Bob Showaddiwaddi and the Contractor's Tulip

[MrMarkyMark]

He does have a few cool stories bro, no doubt about it.

They say every man's got a book in them, I see potential for a series here

[Drei]

Honestly I am not sure but it didn't look like it had any, just a one month notice however if it did have one it seems they never found out and my acquaintance was lucky.

Bull or not know I just stated the facts.

[northernladuk]

WALOB. No handcuff clause?

I had to google that

[LondonManc]

Let me rephrase. Person got £128 a day from the agency and the agency dealt with it as an umbrella. The person was directly employed by the said agency, was receiving payslips p60 etc.

The agency however was charging the client around £190, confirmed with the person. Role was PMO and this individual was a perm previously.

The 6 months went by and it was renewal time (3 mths rolling). The individual gave the agency notice one month I believe, talked to the client and went direct at £250 a day.

Moral is that they are £122 a day better off, which comes to about £2600 more a month which comes to £32K a year... pretty damn big difference.

£250 a day low be it is still £5500 a month and £66K a year.

Big difference from the £33K they were initially on, don't you think? So NO Mr smarty pants it isn't a saving of ONLY £20 on Tax...



Now if you find your own contract and decide to employ the services of an umbrella company, which by the way it can also be any of us that have a Ltd company
The umbrella will take their cut for doing your taxes, whatever that may be. As i said, I worked it out and the difference came to about £2500 (not including umbrella fee).

WALOB. No handcuff clause?

[Drei]

Well to quote the agency "if you don't have a Ltd we can provide you with an Umbrella service" hence the reason they worked for the agency.

I have just started a 3 month rolling contract and using contractorumbrella.

But yes you are correct. Since the OP didn't make it clear, I have no idea what their deal is. Could be employed via the agency direct or be using an umbrella once they secured their £400 a day contract.

That's why I said best case scenario double their earnings, minimal diff scenario about £2500. Depends how much 2.5K means to someone.

[northernladuk]

Let me rephrase. Person got £128 a day from the agency and the agency dealt with it as an umbrella. The person was directly employed by the said agency, was receiving payslips p60 etc.

The agency however was charging the client around £190, confirmed with the person. Role was PMO and this individual was a perm previously.

The 6 months went by and it was renewal time (3 mths rolling). The individual gave the agency notice one month I believe, talked to the client and went direct at £250 a day.

Moral is that they are £122 a day better off, which comes to about £2600 more a month which comes to £32K a year... pretty damn big difference.

£250 a day low be it is still £5500 a month and £66K a year.

Big difference from the £33K they were initially on, don't you think? So NO Mr smarty pants it isn't a saving of ONLY £20 on Tax...

So he was PAYE through the agency and not with an umbrella at all... Ah we are getting somewhere... So the umbrella isn't taking anything and in fact didn't even exist?

[Drei]

Let me rephrase. Person got £128 a day from the agency and the agency dealt with it as an umbrella. The person was directly employed by the said agency, was receiving payslips p60 etc.

The agency however was charging the client around £190, confirmed with the person. Role was PMO and this individual was a perm previously.

The 6 months went by and it was renewal time (3 mths rolling). The individual gave the agency notice one month I believe, talked to the client and went direct at £250 a day.

Moral is that they are £122 a day better off, which comes to about £2600 more a month which comes to £32K a year... pretty damn big difference.

£250 a day low be it is still £5500 a month and £66K a year.

Big difference from the £33K they were initially on, don't you think? So NO Mr smarty pants it isn't a saving of ONLY £20 on Tax...



Now if you find your own contract and decide to employ the services of an umbrella company, which by the way it can also be any of us that have a Ltd company
The umbrella will take their cut for doing your taxes, whatever that may be. As i said, I worked it out and the difference came to about £2500 (not including umbrella fee).

[diseasex]

hi i have umbrella because i have no idea about anything. Can i go limited so i can save 20£ on tax????

[LondonManc]

Not so sure. Remember we always say the percentage depends on the rate. If the agent needs 30 quid a day out of a contractor it's going to be a massive chunt of 128 compared to 500. There has to be a level where it's just not worth his while.

Does kick off a debate that someone earning 128 a day shouldn't really be a contractor, they should be temping.

The going direct and charging more isn't a standard model either so I wouldn't be reading too much in to that even if it is true.

He does have a few cool stories bro, no doubt about it.

[northernladuk]

So the agency was taking 30% of £128? Sounds like your "friend" got shafted and didn't shop around, although the bigger shafting was by the agency taking best part of 50%!

Not so sure. Remember we always say the percentage depends on the rate. If the agent needs 30 quid a day out of a contractor it's going to be a massive chunt of 128 compared to 500. There has to be a level where it's just not worth his while.

Does kick off a debate that someone earning 128 a day shouldn't really be a contractor, they should be temping.

The going direct and charging more isn't a standard model either so I wouldn't be reading too much in to that even if it is true.

[LondonManc]

Made the assumption that the OP got a contract via an Agency on a 3 month rolling. Foxwell did so with someone I knew a while ago, 3 months rolling with the NHS. The umbrella agency was taking %30 from their daily rate. The person was on £128 a day and the agency was charging the client £185. Eventually they gave the the agency the boot and went direct charging £250 a day.

So the agency was taking 30% of £128? Sounds like your "friend" got shafted and didn't shop around, although the bigger shafting was by the agency taking best part of 50%!

[northernladuk]

Umbrella agency?