Originally posted by Scoobos
View Post
- 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!
Collapse
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.
Logging in...
Previously on "CJRS publication - transparency or "name & shame""
Collapse
-
-
Public is (will be) paying for it, so info should be public - should have been from start, not just Dec 2020.
Fraud in furlough must be sky high.
Leave a comment:
-
My view is that given that as this went in with no planning, they probably don't have any real recorded way of tracking who claimed legitimately and who didn't - so they will be looking for disgruntled employees to shop their ex employers.
Leave a comment:
-
Yeah I personally think they might be trying to reduce the takeup - or even get people to repay it as that would be easier than trying to find the cash elsewhere. I also agree with the viewpoint in the article that:
“Employers may prefer not to submit claims under the extended CJRS, even where they are technically eligible to do so, to avoid this publicity, especially where the employer’s business is profitable,” said Hannah Ford of the law firm Stevens & Bolton.
Leave a comment:
-
I don't know. I am conflicted. I do think the public should have a right to know because it is taxpayer money and do agree with transparency.
Buuuuuuut, transparency is obviously not the agenda, it's to guilt them into paying back the money which the media has been assisting them with by naming and shaming companies already even prior to this being published.
So I guess my problem is less with the government and more with the media for running with these stories and putting pressure on businesses not to accept assistance they qualify for.
Leave a comment:
-
CJRS publication - transparency or "name & shame"
Just got this from gov.uk, I'm sure others might have done too...
Publishing information about your CJRS claims
We are now publishing a monthly list of employers who claimed under the CJRS for periods from December onwards on GOV.UK, as part of HMRC’s commitment to transparency and to deter fraudulent claims.
This will include (from 25 February) employer names, Company Registration Numbers (for those who have one) and banded amounts of how much the claim was for.
What happens if I pay back my grants?
If you choose to pay back the money you have received, your details will be removed from the list of claims when it is next published (usually in the following month).
I wonder how this published information is likely to be used by other organisations; also where the balance is between transparency to avoid fraud vs. "name & shame" in an effort to get companies who don't actually need the cash or who are not within the spirit of the scheme (e.g. furloughing people who would be made redundant anyway, or over Xmas when the company would have shut down anyway but had to pay its employees anyway).
Further commentary at HMRC to list furlough claimants in anti-fraud move | AccountingWEB
Any thoughts on here?Last edited by CatOnMat; 19 February 2021, 14:44.Tags: None
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Is ‘Open To Work’ on LinkedIn due an IR35 dropdown menu? Today 05:57
- IR35: Control — updated for 2025-26 Sep 28 21:28
- Can a WhatsApp message really be a contract? Sep 25 20:17
- Can a WhatsApp message really be a contract? Sep 25 08:17
- ‘Subdued’ IT contractor jobs market took third tumble in a row in August Sep 25 08:07
- Are CVs medieval or just being misused? Sep 24 05:05
- Are CVs medieval or just being misused? Sep 23 21:05
- IR35: Mutuality Of Obligations — updated for 2025/26 Sep 23 05:22
- Only proactive IT contractors can survive recruitment firm closures Sep 22 07:32
- How should a creditors’ meeting ideally pan out for unpaid suppliers? Sep 19 07:16
Leave a comment: