Whilst eek is correct, HMRC have famously let many companies and their directors slip through the net on this one.
Those who didn't engage with HMRC and considering there are only around 200 fighting the case that means well over 1000 will get off 'Scott' free when HMRC win this. I have also heard but have no hard evidence of a few who managed to close their companies, HMRC though can re-open, I suspect the ones who claim they have closed their companies may have been those who didn't engage but it's all bit far east whispers.
The only fight now will be getting long TTP settlements with HMRC, trying to get the interest at a reasonable rate and holding onto any assets (your home) you may have.
Just an aside I paid on account in full and had my first two years thrown out, nearly 5 years on from handing my money over and 3 years on from them throwing my two years out I have yet to receive a penny back. I suspect I won't get to charge them interest.
- 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.
Logging in...
Previously on "Churchill Knight & Boox clients being investigated as Managed Service Companies"
Collapse
-
Nope and probably nope afterwards. HMRC need the company open so they can get the money from the directors if the company hasn't got it.Originally posted by LondonJamesMc View PostCan I close my company with this outstanding? If yes great, if no will I be able to do it after the tribunal?
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news but that's the reality.
Leave a comment:
-
Can I close my company with this outstanding? If yes great, if no will I be able to do it after the tribunal?
Leave a comment:
-
You don't need assistance, I did this myself for one of my three years.Originally posted by praxeologist View PostI'd like to remind anyone who think they may have paid themselves less than 50% of the company's revenue in any year to consult your tax lawyer as HMRC's demand can be killed that way. Qdos sent them the evidence of me withdrawing less than 50% during the year in question and eventually HMRC accepted it, set the liability to nil and I've since closed the company.
Leave a comment:
-
Might also be worth bearing in mind for anyone, currently with an accountancy provider, who they fear may also be vulnerable to a future MSC attack. Taking less than 50% seems to be the only sure-fire defence.Originally posted by praxeologist View PostI'd like to remind anyone who think they may have paid themselves less than 50% of the company's revenue in any year to consult your tax lawyer as HMRC's demand can be killed that way. Qdos sent them the evidence of me withdrawing less than 50% during the year in question and eventually HMRC accepted it, set the liability to nil and I've since closed the company.
Last edited by woody1; 23 September 2025, 07:39.
Leave a comment:
-
I'd like to remind anyone who think they may have paid themselves less than 50% of the company's revenue in any year to consult your tax lawyer as HMRC's demand can be killed that way. Qdos sent them the evidence of me withdrawing less than 50% during the year in question and eventually HMRC accepted it, set the liability to nil and I've since closed the company.
Leave a comment:
-
As others have previously said, it's not just about the money. A tribunal win for HMRC would make it easier for them to pursue other cases in the future and would create a strong deterrent to other contractors who follow the low salary/high dividend model with similar accountancy firms to Boox and CK.Originally posted by woody1 View PostIt makes you wonder how much HMRC actually stand to claw back from this raid.
I suspect a tiny amount compared to dodgy schemes.
Leave a comment:
-
It makes you wonder how much HMRC actually stand to claw back from this raid.
I suspect a tiny amount compared to dodgy schemes.
Leave a comment:
-
TBH I haven't received the final calculation to see how they applied interest payments. It was sent to my agent and hasn't been forwarded to me yet. I just received a final amount which tied in close to my calculations and as previously stated the overpayments pretty much covered the tax and NI owed so I accepted it to allow the case to be closed. The remaining balance was negligible.Originally posted by Lotok View Post
What did they apply in regards to interest on top of the amount they were claiming from you and what interest was given on the overpayments. Was there a difference?
The process was I received the revised calculations for tax and NI owed without the addition of interest payments. You have 30 days to appeal this calculation after which this settlement becomes final. After the 30 days you can submit separate claims for both CT and dividend tax over payment relief, which you calculate. These overpayment reliefs were also submitted without the addition of interest payments.
I assume interest payments are only applied to the outstanding balance once HMRC have verified the overpayment calculation. Once I receive this final calculation from my agent I'll confirm.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Bruce88 View PostI've managed to settle my case with the HMRC, I thought I'd share my experience.
My first two years were removed from the investigation as I didn't pay myself much from the business, which meant I didn't meet either 61B(1)(b) or 61B(1)(c). Only the final year came under consideration.
HMRC consider pension contributions to be 'payments to the individual' for the purposes of meeting 61B(1)(b) but do not include these contributions in the DEP calculation as they do not consider them as 'general earnings from employment'. Allowable business expenses were also deductible from the DEP total.
Once the DEP calculation was complete, I had to submit separate claims for corporation and dividend tax overpayments. However, I didn't have to pay the outstanding bill and wait for separate overpayment refunds, rather the overpayments were included in the calculation for the final outstanding payment.
No penalties were applied.
During the tax year in question my total income didn't exceed the higher tax rate threshold, I didn't split dividends with anyone else and I made significant pension contributions. So my personal circumstances meant that the overpayments pretty much wiped out the total outstanding tax and NI bill.
Being honest, once I made it known to the HMRC that I would be willing to come to a figure and settle, the individual officer I dealt with was quite reasonable and we resolved the matter fairly amicably.
What did they apply in regards to interest on top of the amount they were claiming from you and what interest was given on the overpayments. Was there a difference?
Leave a comment:
-
I've managed to settle my case with the HMRC, I thought I'd share my experience.
My first two years were removed from the investigation as I didn't pay myself much from the business, which meant I didn't meet either 61B(1)(b) or 61B(1)(c). Only the final year came under consideration.
HMRC consider pension contributions to be 'payments to the individual' for the purposes of meeting 61B(1)(b) but do not include these contributions in the DEP calculation as they do not consider them as 'general earnings from employment'. Allowable business expenses were also deductible from the DEP total.
Once the DEP calculation was complete, I had to submit separate claims for corporation and dividend tax overpayments. However, I didn't have to pay the outstanding bill and wait for separate overpayment refunds, rather the overpayments were included in the calculation for the final outstanding payment.
No penalties were applied.
During the tax year in question my total income didn't exceed the higher tax rate threshold, I didn't split dividends with anyone else and I made significant pension contributions. So my personal circumstances meant that the overpayments pretty much wiped out the total outstanding tax and NI bill.
Being honest, once I made it known to the HMRC that I would be willing to come to a figure and settle, the individual officer I dealt with was quite reasonable and we resolved the matter fairly amicably.
Leave a comment:
-
This is only for Churchill Knight, still no dates for Boox yet.Originally posted by dayd08 View PostHMRC have pushed dates back as their council got the dates wrong.
They are scrambling..maybe
Surely they have to stop the interest accruing now.Last edited by rdw1970; 13 August 2025, 08:08.
Leave a comment:
- 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
- 26 predictions for UK IT contracting in 2026 Today 07:17
- How salary sacrifice pension changes will hit contractors Dec 24 07:48
- All the big IR35/employment status cases of 2025: ranked Dec 23 08:55
- Why IT contractors are (understandably) fed up with recruitment agencies Dec 22 13:57
- Contractors, don’t fall foul of HMRC’s expenses rules this Christmas party season Dec 19 09:55
- A delay to the employment status consultation isn’t why an IR35 fix looks further out of reach Dec 18 08:22
- How asking a tech jobs agency basic questions got one IT contractor withdrawn Dec 17 07:21
- Are Home Office immigration policies sacrificing IT contractors for ‘cheap labour’? Dec 16 07:48
- Will 2026 see the return of the ‘Outside IR35’ contractor? Dec 15 07:51
- Contractors, Reeves’ dividends raid is disastrous. Act, but without acceptance Dec 12 07:10

Leave a comment: