Reply to: child maintenance

[speling bee]

She's probably got a toy boy on the side paid for with your divvies. Just saying like. rod:

If framing it in this way helps you to cope with my happiness, then go right ahead.

[eek]

Still going good after 16 years.

You'd get less for murder provided you behavioured yourself.

[MarillionFan]

Still going good after 16 years.

She's probably got a toy boy on the side paid for with your divvies. Just saying like. rod:

[speling bee]

We've all been there. Afterwards you'll realise that all that love and attention would have been better directed inwards.

Still going good after 16 years.

[escapeUK]

She's the love of my heart.

We've all been there. Afterwards you'll realise that all that love and attention would have been better directed inwards.

[speling bee]

Its nice we agree on something.



Hahha what a sucker. I hope she returns the favour in bed.

She's the love of my heart.

[escapeUK]

Good.

Its nice we agree on something.

I pay the bills except childcare and the missus gets 14k p.a. in divis. Perhaps we could enter a civil partnership.

Hahha what a sucker. I hope she returns the favour in bed.

[MarillionFan]

Dividend splitting between married couples is perfectly legitimate. Granted it goes back to earlier days when married couples were treated as a single tax entity but you may as well use all the advantages you can get.

However you need to be married for it to work so that rules you out MF.

Well until after July 2013 next year at which point I'll be perm anyway.

[speling bee]

So to your previous inference that she looks after the children when they're sick, actually she just looks after the children and is a stay at home mum. Nice work if you can get it.

No, she works.

[eek]

Whats does Mrs SB do for her £14k in divis? I don't pay Mrs MF from my Ltd but we have all savings/investments/rental income in her name set up to a tax free allowance.

Dividend splitting between married couples is perfectly legitimate. Granted it goes back to earlier days when married couples were treated as a single tax entity but you may as well use all the advantages you can get.

However you need to be married for it to work so that rules you out MF.

[MarillionFan]

If the Ltd was paying a salary, that would be relevant. But she is a shareholder.

And within the context of a family business she shoulders more than her share of child care responsibilities ti enable me to keep turning up at client site.

So to your previous inference that she looks after the children when they're sick, actually she just looks after the children and is a stay at home mum. Nice work if you can get it.

[speling bee]

So I say again, what does she do for the Ltd?

If the Ltd was paying a salary, that would be relevant. But she is a shareholder.

And within the context of a family business she shoulders more than her share of child care responsibilities ti enable me to keep turning up at client site.

[MarillionFan]

Family business. She bears the brunt of time off work when the kids are ill etc.

So I say again, what does she do for the Ltd?

[speling bee]

So she doesnt do anything for it then. Just a tax scam.

Family business. She bears the brunt of time off work when the kids are ill etc.

[MarillionFan]

She shares the risk of me being a contractor.

So she doesnt do anything for it then. Just a tax scam.