Self Assessment Confusion?!

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!

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.

Fresh Air replied

10 November 2008, 12:40
No, nothing.....?? Anyone out there got any ideas!
Leave a comment:
Fresh Air started a topic Self Assessment Confusion?!

8 November 2008, 13:59
Self Assessment Confusion?!

There has been a lot of coverage regarding the Service Companies question on the 2007-08 SA form - my confusion, however, is not whether to fill the box in or not, but what has to be input. Ill try and explain....

What happens if during the same tax year there were two employments for two different companies - one company paid all income under deemed employment, the other as income plus dividends??

The SA form states that "total amount of any income" nees to be put in the box, but later guidance states that you "do not complete this box if all the income" was derived as employment income??

In a long winded way, I guess what im asking whether the figure needs to be just the salary+dividend element of the tax year or total from both employments??

Any advice would be welcome (flaming would not!)
Tags: None