Reply to: Redundancy

[northernladuk]

Isn't it a CUK rule to ban anyone accusing others of being a sockie in the professional forums? Or did I misread that sometime earlier.

That's the Wednesday afternoon rule. It's different on a Thursday morning. How rigorously it's enforced also depends on the mood of any one of the mods at any given time..

Hope that clears it up for you.

[ChimpMaster]

I don’t believe he is a sockie, I believe he has been given some bad accountancy advice from friends/relatives, or perhaps none at all and possibly thinks that he doesn’t need to pay tax etc.

Isn't it a CUK rule to ban anyone accusing others of being a sockie in the professional forums? Or did I misread that sometime earlier.

[Lance]

WWTFHS. We see plenty of these types on here thrashing about so although very strange it's not beyond the realms of possibility. Look at the guys story in the link I posted. Makes some incredible reading buy I've no doubt there are plenty of people like that out there.

In that link HMRC accused the locum of basically lying and the tribunal ‘were sympathetic’ to that view.

There are plenty of people who think they can just get away with it, and many do unfortunately. I have zero sympathy when they get caught.
The OP probably isn’t a sockie, but the conflicting tales suggest a liar to me. One trying to see if a slightly different lie has a different outcome (trying it on here before trying it on with HMRC).

[northernladuk]

WWTFHS. We see plenty of these types on here thrashing about so although very strange it's not beyond the realms of possibility. Look at the guys story in the link I posted. Makes some incredible reading buy I've no doubt there are plenty of people like that out there.

[WTFH]

Previous posts directly contradict each other. Started contracting in March, yet in September hadn’t started at all????

OP is a liar, a sockie or an idiot (or combination of).

I don’t believe he is a sockie, I believe he has been given some bad accountancy advice from friends/relatives, or perhaps none at all and possibly thinks that he doesn’t need to pay tax etc.

[Lance]

Good point, well made.

Nishant, get yourself an accountant. Something in the back of my mind thinks that you might not be being completely honest with us, or are trying to hoodwink the taxman.

You need an accountant.

In your previous post you said the company was not profitable, yet here you think it has enough money to pay redundancy, well there must be money sitting in it then!

Previous posts directly contradict each other. Started contracting in March, yet in September hadn’t started at all????

OP is a liar, a sockie or an idiot (or combination of).

[Lance]

Eh?? Haven't you just contradicted yourself there?

I think I disappeared in a loop of logic.

[WTFH]

[QUOTE=northernladuk;2481783]He hasn't got one. Have a look at his posting history. It makes for some very odd reading as he's only just asking how to pay himself but he's already trading.


Good point, well made.

Nishant, get yourself an accountant. Something in the back of my mind thinks that you might not be being completely honest with us, or are trying to hoodwink the taxman.

You need an accountant.

In your previous post you said the company was not profitable, yet here you think it has enough money to pay redundancy, well there must be money sitting in it then!

[northernladuk]

No. I think it’s fair to call it a sweeping generalisation.
It’s also almost certainly correct based on the reasonable assumptions though.

Eh?? Haven't you just contradicted yourself there?

[Lance]

Very nice but this isn't one. He's put the minimum effort in to understanding how to be a contractor and he's put minimum effort in to trying to end it. He will have a standard setup so the standard advice will stand.

Generally you are right about the sweeping statements but he's asking a bunch of contractors not tax specialists with no details so he's getting an answer based on a pretty solid set of assumptions. Hardly a sweeping generalisation.

No. I think it’s fair to call it a sweeping generalisation.
It’s also almost certainly correct based on the reasonable assumptions though.

Sweeping generalisations aren’t always bad. To suggest otherwise is a sweeping generalisation as well.

[northernladuk]

He hasn't got one. Have a look at his posting history. It makes for some very odd reading as he's only just asking how to pay himself but he's already trading.

[WTFH]

Hello Friends,

I started contracting this year in March and my first one year contract ended prematurely in September. I could not find a new contract in last two months. I have no option but to go for Perm position.

I was thinking if my business has to close down, Can I pay redundancy to the company secretory and director ( myself ) ? And if so, what are the legal hurdles and documents I need to prepare towards this.

Thanks for your advise.

Regards

I would advise you to speak to your accountant.

If you keep your business open then you will be ready should a new contract come along before you start a permanent role.
If you have already secured a permanent role then there is no redundancy to pay. Your company isn’t closed yet, so you aren’t being made redundant, you are resigning as a company director.
And underlying all of this, don’t forget you will still have to pay corporation tax and submit VAT returns, so you can’t just drain all the funds out of the company. This is why you need your accountant to explain all this to you.

[TheFaQQer]

Very nice but this isn't one. He's put the minimum effort in to understanding how to be a contractor and he's put minimum effort in to trying to end it. He will have a standard setup so the standard advice will stand. This article covers it.

How do you know that? I've not read every post here, so I'm happy to concede that there may be other evidence outside this thread, but how do you know what setup the OP has? What is the standard advice? (I thought the standard advice was to ask your accountant, which is where I would start)

HMRC say that it's possible (see here) so maybe the correct answer is "possibly, but unlikely" rather than assuming that there is no contract of employment (either actual or implied) and saying "no" outright (as explained in this article).

[northernladuk]

Apart from those circumstances when you can, if course.

If you have been employed for more than two years then you can receive statutory redundancy pay - but it's not payable to the self-employed, those in partnerships, or office holders who do not have an employment contract.

There's an interesting article on Accounting Web here about it, which ends with the very sage advice:



Rather than making sweeping generalisations based on very little information, that sounds like good advice to me.

Very nice but this isn't one. He's put the minimum effort in to understanding how to be a contractor and he's put minimum effort in to trying to end it. He will have a standard setup so the standard advice will stand.

Generally you are right about the sweeping statements but he's asking a bunch of contractors not tax specialists with no details so he's getting an answer based on a pretty solid set of assumptions. Hardly a sweeping generalisation.

[eek]

And starts with

"Never, ever take tax advice from the man (or woman) in the pub, unless of course you know that he or she is an experienced tax adviser." which is even better advice

What happens if said tax adviser is suggesting you join a scheme.....

And NLUK advice is correct based on what the OP said - he went contracting in March (started company then) contract finished early in September and now he's going permanent. Hence you don't qualify to receive (or for your company to make) redundancy payments just pay the profits (after tax) out as dividends....