- 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!
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 "Child support tribunal & umbrella companies"
Collapse
-
Oops .... sorry meant to say they WILL NOT postpone if you are not there the finding will go against you
-
Have had family experience of this rubbish the one very important thing is you MUST attend if you don't everything is lost (I know you say you are but believe me they just chuck it out if you are not there in person) this is the voice of experience.
They will award against you in the hardest terms even if you are not ready they will postpone if you are not there.
Leave a comment:
-
Thanks
I've already sent in a detailed written submission to the tribunal giving the background to IT industry and how freelance consulting works, together with what I believe to be a comprehensive rebuttal of that UTT decision.
I'll also certainly be attending the hearing in person.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by eek View PostLittle - you forget that Mal has to make a comment on anything and everything for the sake of it even when its utterly unhelpful....
as I said, its worth going in with a short explanation as to how you work so that the tribunal can see what is actually going on rather than being told incorrect information based on invalid assumptions....
and make sure you turn up. As stated earlier the father in the case you linked didn't offer much in evidence of expenses or turning up to explain.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by eek View PostLittle - you forget that Mal has to make a comment on anything and everything for the sake of it even when its utterly unhelpful....
as I said, its worth going in with a short explanation as to how you work so that the tribunal can see what is actually going on rather than being told incorrect information based on invalid assumptions....
Perhaps a few less ad hominems and more vision is needed
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by easy rider View PostAs I see it, the problem arises because there is no legal definition of an umbrella company (at least in this context). I ran a search at legislation.gov.uk and umbrella company is only mentioned in relation to open-ended investment companies - not the same beast, methinks.
Without a definition in law, umbrella companies cannot be treated differently from any other employer.
The term umbrella company appears to be used very loosely - there is a 2006 UT tribunal decision, where the commissioner uses the term to refer to what we see as a LtdCo or PSC, not what we view as a brolly.
The 'Payslips' from my old brolly have 3 sections:
* top section - the real payslip with gross pay, tax, NI, net pay etc.
* mid section - employee expenses
* bottom section - what the brolly invoiced for, their fee & employment expenses deducted
Umbrella companies have to be transparent about their fees, but it doesn't alter the fact that the invoiced amount is never my income, just as it won't be if I were an IBM employee billed as BoS to a client.
The CSA send out an employer enquiry form which has a special "umbrella" section which has a gross pay box, followed by brolly fees box & employment costs box. An accounts assistant fills in the form putting the invoice value in the gross pay box and sends it back to CSA.
I understand how the CSA are leading the umbrella company and tribunals up the garden path with their form, but my point is, there is NO definition of an umbrella company in the law, let alone any special treatment. Therefore the CSA are acting illegally. I've put in a FOI to CSA to try to get some clarity on what legislation they think they are applying when they treat umbrella companies differently.
What, if any, are the faults in my logic?
as I said, its worth going in with a short explanation as to how you work so that the tribunal can see what is actually going on rather than being told incorrect information based on invalid assumptions....
Leave a comment:
-
As I see it, the problem arises because there is no legal definition of an umbrella company (at least in this context). I ran a search at legislation.gov.uk and umbrella company is only mentioned in relation to open-ended investment companies - not the same beast, methinks.
Without a definition in law, umbrella companies cannot be treated differently from any other employer.
The term umbrella company appears to be used very loosely - there is a 2006 UT tribunal decision, where the commissioner uses the term to refer to what we see as a LtdCo or PSC, not what we view as a brolly.
The 'Payslips' from my old brolly have 3 sections:
* top section - the real payslip with gross pay, tax, NI, net pay etc.
* mid section - employee expenses
* bottom section - what the brolly invoiced for, their fee & employment expenses deducted
Umbrella companies have to be transparent about their fees, but it doesn't alter the fact that the invoiced amount is never my income, just as it won't be if I were an IBM employee billed as BoS to a client.
The CSA send out an employer enquiry form which has a special "umbrella" section which has a gross pay box, followed by brolly fees box & employment costs box. An accounts assistant fills in the form putting the invoice value in the gross pay box and sends it back to CSA.
I understand how the CSA are leading the umbrella company and tribunals up the garden path with their form, but my point is, there is NO definition of an umbrella company in the law, let alone any special treatment. Therefore the CSA are acting illegally. I've put in a FOI to CSA to try to get some clarity on what legislation they think they are applying when they treat umbrella companies differently.
What, if any, are the faults in my logic?
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by eek View PostSurely its a matter of this is my contract not income goes to this company...
This is the ownership of the company - I'm not the owner.
These are my payslips.....
And if absolutely necessary draw a pie chart with your weekly income, and the employer NI and umbrella fees shown separately....
Leave a comment:
-
Surely its a matter of this is my contract not income goes to this company...
This is the ownership of the company - I'm not the owner.
These are my payslips.....
And if absolutely necessary draw a pie chart with your weekly income, and the employer NI and umbrella fees shown separately....
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by easy rider View PostCommissioner's are now judges. This is the guy - Prof Nick Wikeley - Judge of the Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber) from 2008
Despite him being a law professor, etc., I believe he is still wrong in law. He is human and can make mistakes.
In a nutshell, my argument is:- An umbrella company has no special definition or treatment in the relevant legislation.
- The contractor is an employee of the umbrella company
- Everything then fits just as it would for any other employer/employee
There is no need for the "third way" that Wikeley is trying to find.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Lance View Postoh.. and it wasn't a judge. It was a Child Support Commissioner so unlikely to be interested in anything other than the CSA laws.
Despite him being a law professor, etc., I believe he is still wrong in law. He is human and can make mistakes.
In a nutshell, my argument is:- An umbrella company has no special definition or treatment in the relevant legislation.
- The contractor is an employee of the umbrella company
- Everything then fits just as it would for any other employer/employee
There is no need for the "third way" that Wikeley is trying to find.
Leave a comment:
-
oh.. and it wasn't a judge. It was a Child Support Commissioner so unlikely to be interested in anything other than the CSA laws.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by easy rider View PostI've got a tribunal hearing coming up soon.
CSA have pointed the Judge to this Upper Tribunal decision - linky
Seriously bad case law which treats the umbrella company fee and employers NI as the contractor's pay.
Judge clearly didn't have a clue what he was talking about - IR35 umbrella company is a contradiction in terms.
Anyone else have to defend against this?
Looks clear cut to me.
The employer's NI being 'not an expense' is the only one that seems questionable but it's a small part anyway.
The biggies were mileage - The father was a no show to court so they just ignored his argument (what an idiot)
and subsistence - which is treated differently for CSA cases as for income tax.
The subsistence not being broken down didn't help the father either.
I can see that it's probably not fair. But the question around legality seems fruitless. Especially as the link is a pure legal assessment of an earlier decision.
Make sure you turn up to court. And if you've got high expenses then expect to be shafted.
Leave a comment:
-
Child support tribunal & umbrella companies
I've got a tribunal hearing coming up soon.
CSA have pointed the Judge to this Upper Tribunal decision - linky
Seriously bad case law which treats the umbrella company fee and employers NI as the contractor's pay.
Judge clearly didn't have a clue what he was talking about - IR35 umbrella company is a contradiction in terms.
Anyone else have to defend against this?Last edited by easy rider; 31 December 2016, 11:59.Tags: None
- 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: