Reply to: Umbrellas Doomed?

[TheBigYinJames]

could soon be left with one choice, ltd. No denying that they are hard work compared to the deceased MSC and the convenience of an Umbrella solution but the likes of www.inniaccounts.co.uk make running a ltd co a heck of a lot easier!

Another thinly veiled advertising pitch?

[Square-eyes]

could soon be left with one choice, ltd. No denying that they are hard work compared to the deceased MSC and the convenience of an Umbrella solution but the likes of www.inniaccounts.co.uk make running a ltd co a heck of a lot easier!

[Addanc]

I think there may well be a case for reducing the 2 years, perhaps to 6 months. This would catch a lot of 'permitractors' who are not really at a site on a temporary basis at all.

Don't think I've worked on a project that was less than 6 months. Plus the nature of the embedded work I do means that I need access to prototype hardware; the prototype hardware is quite often a shared resource, you've got to be on hand to use it when you can. I'll just have to insist the client install the prototype hardware at my Ltdco HQ on future gigs.

[TheBigYinJames]

So no I don't feel inadequate in my lack of courage I just hate the dishonest people who get away with it. I'd not realised that was so wrong.

Hating is always wrong. If they are being bad, then bad things will happen to them, no need for you to take pleasure out of it.

[Addanc]

HM Treasury said “widespread abuse” of the rules for travel expenses from both types of business by putting temps on such contracts has deprived the Exchequer of £300m in tax.

£300M, nasty naughty contractors , since government spending runs to 650 billion/year they need every penny. I'll bet the MP's expenses run to more than £300M/year, I wonder if they will stop them?

[Damo1176]

So because you feel inadequate at your lack of courage you wish to see financial ruin on others?

Courage? Oh so claiming dodgy expenses etc isn't about being honest and claiming what you should but whether you have big enough cahoonas to risk it..

I think the poeple that basically lie and steel deserve financial ruin....the ones that laugh at me and say well you earn £100 less a week not claiming it but I am cos my umbrella says I can, yes I want them to come back to me further down the line and find that they've got caught and aren't laughing anymore. Infact if I hear one more person say well loads of people do it so so will I. SO if if you walk downthe street and see people breaking into cars you'll do the same cos everyone else is.

I hope for a fair world where hard work and honesty is what is worth more and gets you money and gets you places not how much you are willing to risk in obtaining more money.

So no I don't feel inadequate in my lack of courage I just hate the dishonest people who get away with it. I'd not realised that was so wrong.

[TheBigYinJames]

Still don't get it, do you? That's a good thing: if you can't use teir facilities, you're clearly ot a member of staff so are clearly not an employee so probably cannot be liable for IR35... £35 a week saves you 15% on your gross contract value.

Some people really ought to learn cost accountancy.

You forget, I use a brolly, so IR35 considerations don't affect me. I'd much rather have been able to park outside the door of the place I worked.

[malvolio]

The Plaza.

Contractors weren't allowed to park in their staff car park (which was half empty) and I had to park in the Odeon's car park across the road at £7 a day, a cost which I extracted from them by leaving a few mins earlier than I claimed each day, the swines.

Still don't get it, do you? That's a good thing: if you can't use teir facilities, you're clearly ot a member of staff so are clearly not an employee so probably cannot be liable for IR35... £35 a week saves you 15% on your gross contract value.

Some people really ought to learn cost accountancy.

[TheBigYinJames]

Which one - there were 7

I was in Matheson, Boyd, Reynolds and St James during my time there.
Others from what I can remember were Plaza (the big blue one), Partnership and Coalport.

The Plaza.

Contractors weren't allowed to park in their staff car park (which was half empty) and I had to park in the Odeon's car park across the road at £7 a day, a cost which I extracted from them by leaving a few mins earlier than I claimed each day, the swines.

[Sausage Surprise]

I had a stint at the Telford EDS building. Nice looking building, woefully short of toilets. I lasted 10 weeks before packing it in. I was scared at how bad it was, and this was a govt contract.

Which one - there were 7

I was in Matheson, Boyd, Reynolds and St James during my time there.
Others from what I can remember were Plaza (the big blue one), Partnership and Coalport.

[TheBigYinJames]

That's what they do after 2 years so the permie isn't out of pocket. I worked in Telford for 3 years and Lytham for 4 years for EDS as a permie - home base was in the NE. After 2 years at each they picked up the BIK tax bill.

I had a stint at the Telford EDS building. Nice looking building, woefully short of toilets. I lasted 10 weeks before packing it in. I was scared at how bad it was, and this was a govt contract.

[Sausage Surprise]

Why is out of context? If EDS guys can claim T&S, and it's tax deductable, then how are they evading the law as it stands now? There's 3 possibilities:

1. They're breaking the law
2. EDS are picking up the employees tax charge
3. They've found a way round

Further, it seems to me difficult to change the rules on expenses in such a way that EDS won't be affected, but we will.

On what basis do you state that the government hold the view that

That's what they do after 2 years so the permie isn't out of pocket. I worked in Telford for 3 years and Lytham for 4 years for EDS as a permie - home base was in the NE. After 2 years at each they picked up the BIK tax bill.

[Jubber]

I have come close to packing it in a couple of times and I live in constant fear that at some time in the future the fruits of all my hard work could be ripped away because som HR bod who I have never had dealings with says the wrong thing to Hector.

Get it out of the company then dear Hector will have nowt. If your papers are in order and no slight of hand can be proved, he can have the 200 pounds float you keep in the company.

Not ideal I know - but not worth the risk of leaving podges of loot in the company account.

[original PM]

but I seem to remember that if you work for an umbrella, since they don't undertake to pay you once your current contract runs out, this means that you expect to work at client site for the whole duration of your employment, that means it is not a temporary workplace, therefore you are not allowed to claim even for the first two years.

Generally you are actually employed by the brolly and if you wished to turn up for work at their offices they would be obliged to pay you minimum wage for the hours you were there. (no one is ever likely to do this because it is for minimum wage and you could not claim expenses)

They also have a clause regarding a minimum of 336 hours payment in the second twelve months of your contract. (not sure what bearing this has)

In essence the relationship has not changed but the way it is worded in the contract has which gets it around the whole temporary workplace issue.

[TheBigYinJames]

... but I seem to remember that if you work for an umbrella, since they don't undertake to pay you once your current contract runs out, this means that you expect to work at client site for the whole duration of your employment, that means it is not a temporary workplace, therefore you are not allowed to claim even for the first two years.

It's not right. An umbrella has what is known as an over-arching contract with you. When an individual client contract runs out, you are still under contract with the brolly (employed by them), you just can't get any money out of them.