Reply to: Guilty until proved innocent

[raphal]

If someone is caught by IR35, will there be any action on the client and the agency the contractor was engaged with ?

No Next!

I thought client avoiding NI & PAYE by taking contractor, should get the attention of hmrc as much the contractor who was caught by IR35.

[AtW]

Using scare tactics a lot of people just pay up. Now they have APN and can take money direct from your account. A lot of people will just fold under the pressure.

How would that happen if vast majority of people had their money spent already?

What will have to happen is bi-partisan bill quickly passed called The Involuntary Organ Donations Act 2015.

[BrilloPad]

I can't see HMRC coming after people possibly caught by IR35 in the same blanket manner; it's not just IT contractors and the like that work in this way but plenty of managers and company directors AKA traditional Tories.

It kicked off a few years ago as it was "revealed" in the press that lots of public sector managers were working in this way, e.g. in the BBC etc. which ruffled feathers as obviously they're taxpayer funded. Not so the private sector.

I think this is just a shot above the bows for people considering these agressive schemes.. "We'll come after you at any point in the future.."

Total bollux.

Using scare tactics a lot of people just pay up. Now they have APN and can take money direct from your account. A lot of people will just fold under the pressure.

HMRC are getting more aggressive and they need to be stopped.

[vetran]

If someone is caught by IR35, will there be any action on the client and the agency the contractor was engaged with ?

No Next!

[raphal]

I can't see HMRC coming after people possibly caught by IR35 in the same blanket manner; it's not just IT contractors and the like that work in this way but plenty of managers and company directors AKA traditional Tories.

It kicked off a few years ago as it was "revealed" in the press that lots of public sector managers were working in this way, e.g. in the BBC etc. which ruffled feathers as obviously they're taxpayer funded. Not so the private sector.

I think this is just a shot above the bows for people considering these agressive schemes.. "We'll come after you at any point in the future.."

If someone is caught by IR35, will there be any action on the client and the agency the contractor was engaged with ?

[vetran]

I agree this may have had something to do with it.

HMRC's Razor


Never attribute to nicety that which is adequately explained by improved chance of payment.

[psychocandy]

did your brother have any assets?

If he had none being nice was the only way they could get him to pay.

I agree this may have had something to do with it.

[AtW]

And what is wrong with lawfully avoiding?

Nothing if your plan is to have your life totally wrecked by the tax office.

[d000hg]

I think this is just a shot above the bows for people considering these agressive schemes.. "We'll come after you at any point in the future.."

BN66 et al should've probably hammered home the point "don't f*** with HMRC" by now but I agree.

[BrilloPad]

More greed cells in the head than brain cells.

"In the words of Kenneth Parker J, the Scheme would “appear to realise every taxpayer’s dream of lawfully avoiding, or at least greatly reducing, income tax in any
jurisdiction”. In the case of Mr Huitson the effective rate of tax he would suffer on his income would be approximately 3.5%"

And what is wrong with lawfully avoiding?

Its irrelevant anyway - the question is should HMRC be allowed to assume guilt?

[vetran]

did your brother have any assets?

If he had none being nice was the only way they could get him to pay.

[rl4engc]

I can't see HMRC coming after people possibly caught by IR35 in the same blanket manner; it's not just IT contractors and the like that work in this way but plenty of managers and company directors AKA traditional Tories.

It kicked off a few years ago as it was "revealed" in the press that lots of public sector managers were working in this way, e.g. in the BBC etc. which ruffled feathers as obviously they're taxpayer funded. Not so the private sector.

I think this is just a shot above the bows for people considering these agressive schemes.. "We'll come after you at any point in the future.."

[MrMarkyMark]

Point being - from what I've seen they aint gonna come steaming in demand £200K and declare you bankrupt.

Point now actually being, different times, different government, different deficit.
I'm sure everyone feels really reassured reading your brothers story and associated comments.

[psychocandy]

Must admit I didn't know that about APNs. i.e. You had to pay up then sort it out later or face penalties....

But, in reality surely this isnt going to happen surely?

Like I said, going back to the story of my brother. Self-employed. Didn't bother paying tax for 5 years. Chucked letters in the bin, demands etc. Just bunged it all and ignored them. Eventually, and it took them years, they got serious though and threatened jail etc. because he was bang to rights.

So he decided to sort it out. Can't remember the exact figures but he owed something like 50K with a part of this being fines etc obviously.

In the end, after he got an accountant on board to do the bargaining etc, they waived ALL the fines, and even some of the outstanding tax. He paid I think a few K up front, then the rest over about 2-3 years every month. Ended up paying less than he would have originally. (but he still moaned).

Point being - from what I've seen they aint gonna come steaming in demand £200K and declare you bankrupt. I could be wrong of course but this is just what I've seen.

[Zero Liability]

And I thought avoidance was legal?

Anyway, my concern is that APN powers will be extended to anyone HMRC believes is IR35 caught. And will take the money allegedly owed directly out of bank accounts.

I really hope that IPSE and writing to MPs and petitions will make a difference.

They could be, but I presume it would require substantial legislative change, because my understanding is that they can only do this where they believe the scheme in question is materially similar to one already defeated in court. I struggle to see how they could do that with IR35, where their win:loss ratio when challenged is abysmal, and where each case is fairly unique. Perhaps if they reformed it to boil it down to SDC, but even then that is a pretty complex area of law.