Apologies, I must have misinterpreted it. I don’t hold a grudge with the council. If I was in their place or yet better running business and needed staff I couldn’t afford on permanent contracts, I would have done exactly the same if there was nothing stopping or no repercussion on me.
Anyway, thanks for all the advice again.
- 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 "HMRC IR35 complaints ignored for 7 months and counting"
Collapse
-
I never said I look down on council workers. I said I beg to differ about councils being good employers. I can't think of many places that would have treated more shabbily than you have been here for starters, but as I said, that's for another thread.
Leave a comment:
-
Well if you think that, then just wait till IR35 hits the private sector, then you’ll hear about respect for workers etc. They already work an average of 6 hours a week more than public sector workers for similar pay. Councils are run by people and people will always look for the easiest option available to them. If you think for a minute that a private sector employer in the same situation would have done it differently then good.
Yes we’re done, thanks for everything. If you look down on council workers then it’s no different to the way southerners look down on northerners. But born & bred in London, I was brave enough to go to a northern uni (to the dismay of my friends) but although I wouldn’t chose to live up north again, it was 4 years well spent. It’s not that grim up north or at councils.
Leave a comment:
-
Councils are not so bad as employers after all
Guess we are done now?
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by northernladuk View PostNot sure what else you want us to say now.
Councils are not so bad as employers after all but the HMRC needs to address the issues of who is responsible to pay certain tax when someone is working as a contractor, who is the employer for those caught by IR35 (i.e. agency or umbrella? or are we classed as self-employed?), if we are not self-employed then why are we paying employers contribution from our agreed rate prior to IR35? I made some sacrifices after April 2017 and I hope others don't have to do the same through no fault of their own.
Leave a comment:
-
Sorry, it was indeed a mistake. My umbrella operates under several company names. They're called orange genie but companies house lists about 10 different registered companies/subsidiaries with the same address for them. My figures were for one of those listed but not the one that pays me which is listed as orange genie cover ltd. They had a turnover of £97.7m and a cost sales of £94.8m last year, their filing can be found here https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/c...filing-history
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by plannercontractor View PostMy umbrella, according to Companies House made a profit of £1.58m last year and their turnover was £1.7m. They paid no tax on profits in 2017 as their reconciliation tax of expense in 2016 (@ £6,472) was higher than the standard the rate of corporation tax. If the HRMC had devised a way for us to pay tax normally without umbrella companies they’ll collect way more than they do now. Umbrella companies are just Ltd. companies on steroids, it’s so obvious!
For example, Contractor Umbrella had turnover of £33.9 million last year, cost of sales of £33.2 million, leaving a gross profit of £750k. Then paid wages of £450k leaving a profit after tax of £77k on a turnover of nearly £34million.
Your figures don't stack up.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by SueEllen View PostSince about 2010 the large unions have been fighting councils who use loads of temporary staff to make them permanent after 18months - 2 years.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by plannercontractor View PostIt's interesting how most of you say blame the council but think the HMRC is somehow blameless. Councils are being forced to cut-cost everywhere and they will look at easy targets like employment rather than services due to possible public challenge. Who's going to complain about the council not giving out perm contracts?
Originally posted by plannercontractor View Post<snip>I think I made a mistake coming on here for help as it seems that this is for those who love and enjoy contracting and got there by pure choice, not everyone does and it explains the lack empathy.
Originally posted by plannercontractor View PostIt seems that many of you agree with the HMRC's ruthlessness and accept that it doesn't care where it gets the tax money from as long as it does, for most of you, moving around is the way around it and that is your prerogative. <snip>
Leave a comment:
-
HMRC IR35 complaints ignored for 7 months and counting
It’s a crappy situation, no doubt about it. But I honestly don’t know what to say to make it any less crappy.
If I you didn’t use an umbrella you would have to pay the same amount of tax and both NI’s. The commission for an umbrella is about the same as the fees for an accountant.
I can understand your anger, but this is the working situation of the 21st century. The government needs the tax and it’s the government that make the tax law; HMRC enforces the law - the fact that they are aggressive and ruthless in their application makes not a jot of difference to the majority of PAYE voters.
There are others in a far worse situation than you, and the best that they can do is to settle with HMRC and close down any attempts by HMRC to claim inheritance tax from them.
The best I can advise is to speak to HMRC and try to arrange payment over a couple of years.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by WTFH View PostHMRC are not an employment ombudsman.
...and most of us on here hate them.
You get a £200k mortgage with the bank @ 5% interest (say this was a bailed-out bank from the government after the banking crash). However, the government some years after the bank had paid off its debt, finds that they only charged the bank the interest rate of the 1st year of the debt repayment, although the bank took 10 years to repay its debt.
Now the government ask the bank to make up the additional payments and the bank turns around and says it can't and the only way to do that is to increase the interest rate of say 100,000 of its mortgagees by 15%. The government is warned that these people would lose their homes and most of them live in an area where the government just spent millions improving infrastructures (say schools, stations, roads etc.) and house prices are fairly high in the area. The government says it doesn't care as long as it gets the money back from the bank and the bank goes ahead and raise the interest rate, and the people move out as predicted, the government gets its money budget as interest rate over the 10 year period.
The bank then sells the houses to an investment company (at a low rate) who re-sells them as 2nd homes (say in London, where this is more common). In the end, these houses are only occupied by rich foreigners who only live there in the summer and don't use the facilities. The infrastructure investments are then in vain.
Moral of the story is that the HMRC is responsible for a fair tax system and they can’t penalise contractors who through no fault of theirs are forced to use umbrellas who charge them fees, E-NIC and AP. Councils will still employ contractors at no loss to them but the umbrella companies capture the contractors, use their money for E-NIC and AP then claim it back as tax deductible expenses and pay CT on profits only.
My umbrella, according to Companies House made a profit of £1.58m last year and their turnover was £1.7m. They paid no tax on profits in 2017 as their reconciliation tax of expense in 2016 (@ £6,472) was higher than the standard the rate of corporation tax. If the HRMC had devised a way for us to pay tax normally without umbrella companies they’ll collect way more than they do now. Umbrella companies are just Ltd. companies on steroids, it’s so obvious!
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by northernladuk View PostI can imagine they do. I wonder what would happen if someone challenged it though? That said I guess there is no benefit to do so.
Some info here, for example:
https://www.ucu.org.uk/article/3567/...-of-permanence
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by jamesbrown View PostI think you get redundancy rights after a couple of years, but the reality is that the FTC model is full of holes, and it's really quite easy to keep the same people chugging along on FTCs for way more than two years without their becoming permies. Some sectors, like universities, do this wholesale for temp staff because the work is funded in fixed increments.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by northernladuk View PostI do think the council is totally to blame. If they had offered you a role at then end of the two years then you wouldn't be in this mess. The convulated route they've gone down has exposed you to all of this and put you in a situation you don't like or really understand.
I can't help thinking the council is pushing the law a bit here. They can't extend the FTC. 2 years is the legal maximum at which point they have to offer you a job or get rid. They've done neither of those things. I'm sure by doing this they are either breaking the law or at the very least their own policies.
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
- Streamline Your Retirement with iSIPP: A Solution for Contractor Pensions Sep 1 09:13
- Making the most of pension lump sums: overview for contractors Sep 1 08:36
- Umbrella company tribunal cases are opening up; are your wages subject to unlawful deductions, too? Aug 31 08:38
- Contractors, relabelling 'labour' as 'services' to appear 'fully contracted out' won't dupe IR35 inspectors Aug 31 08:30
- How often does HMRC check tax returns? Aug 30 08:27
- Work-life balance as an IT contractor: 5 top tips from a tech recruiter Aug 30 08:20
- Autumn Statement 2023 tipped to prioritise mental health, in a boost for UK workplaces Aug 29 08:33
- Final reminder for contractors to respond to the umbrella consultation (closing today) Aug 29 08:09
- Top 5 most in demand cyber security contract roles Aug 25 08:38
- Changes to the right to request flexible working are incoming, but how will contractors be affected? Aug 24 08:25
Leave a comment: