Reply to: Something is afoot with AML/Knox

[woody1]

Usually less subterfuge than that - nowadays the UK company will pay minimum wage with everything else sent to the overseas company and then “loaned” back

Can't see how any arrangement like that would ever get around the much tighter DR legislation that's in place now.

These companies must know they're selling a pup.

[eek]

Now that does sound underhand. At least with most schemes, agencies/clients paid the same UK company they had a contract with, albeit the UK company was just a front for an IoM outfit.

Makes you wonder what sort of subterfuge is going on with the schemes still operating today...

Usually less subterfuge than that - nowadays the UK company will pay minimum wage with everything else sent to the overseas company and then “loaned” back

[woody1]

I think you are right. The IoM company received the payments, but UK companies thought they were paying a UK company of the same name. This would bypass bank transfer checks by the payer.

https://www.ft.com/content/647f32ba-...8-b41dca599921

Now that does sound underhand. At least with most schemes, agencies/clients paid the same UK company they had a contract with, albeit the UK company was just a front for an IoM outfit.

Makes you wonder what sort of subterfuge is going on with the schemes still operating today...

[agentzero]

In this case I suspect a lot of the money didn’t go to the UK front company but straight to the IoM company.

but it’s fraud by misrepresentation if SmartPay UK say Jane Smith is employed by SmartPay UK when she’s actually employed by SmartPay IoM

I think you are right. The IoM company received the payments, but UK companies thought they were paying a UK company of the same name. This would bypass bank transfer checks by the payer.

https://www.ft.com/content/647f32ba-...8-b41dca599921

[woody1]

A few years ago I pulled the accounts from the mid-2000s, off Companies House, for one of these IoM scheme UK front companies. It was turning over £59m a year, and £57m went straight out the back door (ie. to the IoM). After paying wages for a handful of staff and office rent, it only made a tiny profit, and paid sod all CT.

[eek]

With virtually every scheme the money flowed like this:

Agencies ➔ UK "front company" ➔ IoM entity ➔ Contractors

If it is fraud, then HMRC have known this for more than 20 years.

In this case I suspect a lot of the money didn’t go to the UK front company but straight to the IoM company.

but it’s fraud by misrepresentation if SmartPay UK say Jane Smith is employed by SmartPay UK when she’s actually employed by SmartPay IoM

[woody1]

and suddenly you go from tax avoidance (which the employee gets shafted about) to fraud, which is a definite criminal offence...

With virtually every scheme the money flowed like this:

Agencies ➔ UK "front company" ➔ IoM entity ➔ Contractors

If it is fraud, then HMRC have known this for more than 20 years.

[eek]

Most schemes had this setup. By about the mid-noughties, agencies wouldn't touch anything IoM, so the schemes had to insert a UK company which the agencies probably assumed was a regular brolly.

and suddenly you go from tax avoidance (which the employee gets shafted about) to fraud, which is a definite criminal offence...

[woody1]

paperwork UK company, but employer and (probably) money going direct to the Isle of Mann

Most schemes had this setup. By about the mid-noughties, agencies wouldn't touch anything IoM, so the schemes had to insert a UK company which the agencies probably assumed was a regular brolly.

[cojak]

Not 100% sure which thread was the best one to post this on so this one will do

https://taxpolicy.org.uk/2024/03/04/..._shadow_fraud/

Dan Neidle has evidence that MR Barrowman committed fraud by misrepresenting which company workers were working through (paperwork UK company, but employer and (probably) money going direct to the Isle of Mann).

Could you copy this to Couldn’t happen to a nicer couple - Contractor UK Bulletin Board please Eek?

Ta!

[eek]

Not 100% sure which thread was the best one to post this on so this one will do

https://taxpolicy.org.uk/2024/03/04/..._shadow_fraud/

Dan Neidle has evidence that MR Barrowman committed fraud by misrepresenting which company workers were working through (paperwork UK company, but employer and (probably) money going direct to the Isle of Mann).

[cojak]

And all in public records!

[WTFH]

...
Well, Carnegie Knox have relocated to the same address as Wharfside, and that address has A LOT of companies recently changed address to there.
Both Carnegie Knox and Wharfside are still operating, but Wharfside are about to take on their customers (under the guise of rebranding).

This is due to happen in August.

It happened in August, and then in December Carnegie Knox became CKBL and is a bit late filing their accounts.

I'm going to throw a new name into the mix now: Innovate Global. I've no idea what it's going to be used for, but stay away from them.

Other names to watch out for: Soldaldo and Perree (both of whom are based in the BVIs, but are very recent)

[eazy]

I used them for Accountancy services only - they prepared company annual accounts only. Never joined any of their schemes, was contacted by HMRC re loans but got all clear. They were local, 5 min drive from the office. Since they have closed their local office and moved to Birmingham, looking for a new accountant.

[WTFH]

I was with Carnegie Knox, received this last week

----------------------
As you will be aware we moved our Aberdeen office to The Wharf in Birmingham a little while ago.

We are now taking this opportunity to relaunch and are changing our name to Wharfside Accountancy Services. What does this mean for you?

You will see no change in your accountant, FreeAgent and Xero, the services we offer and how you engage us. The only change will be your agent registered with HMRC will be Wharfside Accountancy Services.

You will shortly receive a new engagement letter to sign, agent registration forms and a new Direct Debit link from your accountant. They will also include their new contact details.

The changes will take affect from 1^st August and we will issue our first invoices for accountancy services on 25^th August for August accountancy services.

We will be expanding our services offering to not only contractors but to all types of small and medium businesses.

Your accountant will be in touch next week with some further details.

We look forward to continuing to work with you.

Please tell me you are no longer with Carnegie Knox, Wharfside, or any of their associated companies!