Reply to: Accountant recommendation threads inc local requests

[nexusinfo]

Thinking of going with Aardvark for our accounting. I think if you already use them and recommend someone, you get bunged £100?

First person to send me the link - or however it works.

Go!

[jamesbrown]

From my own personal experience of working within a "local" accountancy practice, if MSC is going to go down to clients not taking tax advice on how to structure remuneration then the whole industry is going to collapse! There are a whole host of business owners who appoint an accountant for the very reason of steering them in the best direction of being tax efficient etc.

The issue is whether the advice is standardised across clients and clients accept it in a standardised way, especially if it's linked to some kind of default setting in a custom portal (then you are really stuffed, but there won't be many contractor accountants doing that, I hope ). The problem you face is that Christianuyi completely changed the landscape for ITEPA 9 in practice and there is the potential for the upcoming cases to change it again.

Honestly, I think a lot of the contractor accounting industry could be in a very tough spot, so while you may be presenting this for dramatic effect, you may not be far from the truth, specifically in terms of contractor specialist accountancies. Conversely, high street accountants deal with lots of different types of companies, so it's much harder to argue that they're offering "schemes" to groups of contractors that might be in the grey area where MSCP meets accountancy. It isn't about tax advice, in general, it's about how it's "packaged" and to whom. At the same time, I think there are, presently, more obvious targets than your practice.

[GregRickshaw]

First and foremost we are an accountancy firm, not an agency and we also do not work with agencies in any capacity.

From my own personal experience of working within a "local" accountancy practice, if MSC is going to go down to clients not taking tax advice on how to structure remuneration then the whole industry is going to collapse! There are a whole host of business owners who appoint an accountant for the very reason of steering them in the best direction of being tax efficient etc.

What we seen with some of the practices of those in question in the MSC cases was very different to what you'd expect of an accountancy providers service.

Oh I agree with you totally, accountants have been telling companies for years on how to best be efficient. I also agree with you on the floodgates/collapse I have said this many times on the post for this discussion, HMRC have never cared about the money for this MSC they just want that legislation to go after everyone, CK said this to me pretty much these are the cases which will open the floodgates. That poor soul thinks CK can win, and from what I have seen between CK and Boox, CK has the better defence and the less obvious but they will still lose.

Seems I am no further to getting a recommendation.

[Michael at BI Accountancy]

100% what james says in this reply. I am not going to recommend any of those five to my friend (actually my partner) as it seems HMRC will absolutely go after those guys when they (HMRC) win early next year.

She (my partner) is going to a local chartered accountant, the message is clear to all I think stay away from these contractor specialist agencies.

First and foremost we are an accountancy firm, not an agency and we also do not work with agencies in any capacity.

From my own personal experience of working within a "local" accountancy practice, if MSC is going to go down to clients not taking tax advice on how to structure remuneration then the whole industry is going to collapse! There are a whole host of business owners who appoint an accountant for the very reason of steering them in the best direction of being tax efficient etc.

What we seen with some of the practices of those in question in the MSC cases was very different to what you'd expect of an accountancy providers service.

[GregRickshaw]

They did, and their advertising was terrible, but there are a lot of contractor specialist accountants out there doing (and advertising) very similar things to CK and Boox and, reading through the thread on this site, a lot of their customers will tell you that they personally had a very "hands off" relationship with CK and Boox. These accountants said very similar things regarding compliance and the MSC risk prior to (and after) their investigation by HMRC. That said, if your customers are coming to you with FA and are actively engaged in the business and are not taking IR35 advice or tax optimisation advice etc. from you, then you probably are in a different (lower) risk category.

Anyway, we wait to hear more, but if I were managing a contractor specialist accountancy practice, I would be operating a very belt and braces approach to this, because you can be 100% certain that, if HMRC win at tribunal, they will broaden their scope and probe the legislation a little further as to what is meant by "involved with". The problem for accountants is that merely being under investigation could mean game over, like Boox, so the more you can distance yourself from cookie cutter accountancy packages for clueless contractors, the better.

100% what james says in this reply. I am not going to recommend any of those five to my friend (actually my partner) as it seems HMRC will absolutely go after those guys when they (HMRC) win early next year.

She (my partner) is going to a local chartered accountant, the message is clear to all I think stay away from these contractor specialist agencies.

[GregRickshaw]

Just to jump in here, the way in which we offer and carry out our services are far away from what CK and Boox was doing. As far as MSC is concerned we offer a compliance service with recommendations as per what any other accountancy firm would. We do not make any decisions for our clients nor run their businesses for them.

That's interesting to hear. I must admit I can't see much difference between the 5 in the recommendations and what CK were doing, they do have similar vernacular I have no idea about Boox, I appreciate this discussion is not for here so I'll defer to the other thread for this debate.

[jamesbrown]

Without going into detail the cases going through seemed to do 'a lot' of handholding!

Compliance wise we are satisfied that the services we offer in no way give way to a MSC risk, although I take your point that nobody knows what HMRC may come with next time.

For clients ensuring you know how your business runs and the finances behind it, allowing to make best decisions is going to stand you in the best position for any such enquiry.

They did, and their advertising was terrible, but there are a lot of contractor specialist accountants out there doing (and advertising) very similar things to CK and Boox and, reading through the thread on this site, a lot of their customers will tell you that they personally had a very "hands off" relationship with CK and Boox. These accountants said very similar things regarding compliance and the MSC risk prior to (and after) their investigation by HMRC. That said, if your customers are coming to you with FA and are actively engaged in the business and are not taking IR35 advice or tax optimisation advice etc. from you, then you probably are in a different (lower) risk category.

Anyway, we wait to hear more, but if I were managing a contractor specialist accountancy practice, I would be operating a very belt and braces approach to this, because you can be 100% certain that, if HMRC win at tribunal, they will broaden their scope and probe the legislation a little further as to what is meant by "involved with". The problem for accountants is that merely being under investigation could mean game over, like Boox, so the more you can distance yourself from cookie cutter accountancy packages for clueless contractors, the better.

[Michael at BI Accountancy]

The reality is that, until these cases work through the tribunal next year (and probably for some time afterwards as they work through any appeals), no one really knows the extent to which HMRC has/will be successful in blurring the line. The legislation is drawn quite broadly and Christianuyi surprised a lot of people. There may be more surprises to come.

I am sure you are working hard to be as compliant as you can be, and operating through FA is a good start, as far as we know, but there is a spectrum of risk here and contractor specialist accountancies that operate online and, especially those that offer "all in" packages that do a lot of "handholding", will be squarely in HMRC's crosshairs, regardless of what we currently think ITEPA Chapter 9 might admit. Bottom line, none of us should underestimate the possibility of surprise.

If you want to eliminate the MSC risk (and introduce other risks ), do the accounts yourself. If you don't want to go that far, try to find a local accountant that does end of year returns only. Failing that, use an online contractor accountant that operates through FA or similar and doesn't do a lot of handholding of provide any recommendations about salary/dividend splits etc. To the extent we can speculate on the red flags, they would involve a bespoke portal and advertising that alludes to different levels of service or a high degree of handholding, optimising tax, or anything that implies they will make running your business "easy", which you should obviously be running yourself.

Without going into detail the cases going through seemed to do 'a lot' of handholding!

Compliance wise we are satisfied that the services we offer in no way give way to a MSC risk, although I take your point that nobody knows what HMRC may come with next time.

For clients ensuring you know how your business runs and the finances behind it, allowing to make best decisions is going to stand you in the best position for any such enquiry.

[hobnob]

Has anyone got experience recently with Crunch?

Be aware that they don't use FreeAgent, so that will make it more of a faff if you want to move between them and another accountant.

[jamesbrown]

Just to jump in here, the way in which we offer and carry out our services are far away from what CK and Boox was doing. As far as MSC is concerned we offer a compliance service with recommendations as per what any other accountancy firm would. We do not make any decisions for our clients nor run their businesses for them.

The reality is that, until these cases work through the tribunal next year (and probably for some time afterwards as they work through any appeals), no one really knows the extent to which HMRC has/will be successful in blurring the line. The legislation is drawn quite broadly and Christianuyi surprised a lot of people. There may be more surprises to come.

I am sure you are working hard to be as compliant as you can be, and operating through FA is a good start, as far as we know, but there is a spectrum of risk here and contractor specialist accountancies that operate online and, especially those that offer "all in" packages that do a lot of "handholding", will be squarely in HMRC's crosshairs, regardless of what we currently think ITEPA Chapter 9 might admit. Bottom line, none of us should underestimate the possibility of surprise.

If you want to eliminate the MSC risk (and introduce other risks ), do the accounts yourself. If you don't want to go that far, try to find a local accountant that does end of year returns only. Failing that, use an online contractor accountant that operates through FA or similar and doesn't do a lot of handholding of provide any recommendations about salary/dividend splits etc. To the extent we can speculate on the red flags, they would involve a bespoke portal and advertising that alludes to different levels of service or a high degree of handholding, optimising tax, or anything that implies they will make running your business "easy", which you should obviously be running yourself.

[Michael at BI Accountancy]

Genuinely asking for a friend here, my friend certainly does not want any advice from me!

We seem to be down to a list of 5 (above) are all of these 'safe' I have looked at them and really can't actually distinguish them from any of the rules which brought down CK and Boox apart from the apparent absence of the self made portal.

Which of the five do we feel is the safest for a PSC/Ltd

Cheers

GR

Just to jump in here, the way in which we offer and carry out our services are far away from what CK and Boox was doing. As far as MSC is concerned we offer a compliance service with recommendations as per what any other accountancy firm would. We do not make any decisions for our clients nor run their businesses for them.

[rocktronAMP]

Actually. Clarity is Clarity Taxation

Clarity Taxation Limited
Accountants and Tax Advisers to Contractors and Freelancers, Retailers, Developers and Many More Business Sectors
https://claritytaxation.com/
Monthly Fixed Fee Accounting Package £120 plus VAT
https://forums.contractoruk.com/acco...ml#post2925496


Northern Lad NLUK suggested Gorilla when he was Outside IR35. I am tossing up between Gorilla and Clarity at the moment...

A long time ago, somebody who I contracted with in 2019, recommended Crunch
https://www.crunch.co.uk/pricing

They actually have deals for July 2025.
£90 + VAT per month
Has anyone got experience recently with Crunch?

[jamesbrown]

More specifically w/r to avoiding custom online portals, you should work with FreeAgent or similar and ensure you have full control over your accounting/book keeping software (so, in FA terms, Level 8 access or whatever).

[jamesbrown]

No idea about Clarity Accounting. Clarity Taxation, perhaps? This is run by Clare and Craig Szeto, formerly of In Touch, and they are highly recommended.

Regarding the MSC legislation, who knows, but you should probably avoid accountants that maintain a portal and do a lot of hand holding. The smaller the better and you are probably safer using them for annual filings only, like CT and SATR, and not intra-annual filings, like VAT and PAYE RTI. Think more like a traditional high-street accountant and less like an online contractor accountant that offers a cookie-cutter package and pricing policy and advertises things like "we do everything for you" as part of an "all in" package

[GregRickshaw]

Genuinely asking for a friend here, my friend certainly does not want any advice from me!

We seem to be down to a list of 5 (above) are all of these 'safe' I have looked at them and really can't actually distinguish them from any of the rules which brought down CK and Boox apart from the apparent absence of the self made portal.

Which of the five do we feel is the safest for a PSC/Ltd

Cheers

GR