Originally posted by mondeoman
View Post
In my view, it is enough to maintain the corporate veil. I could be wrong, and it would be costly to you if I am.
To accept the role as an inside role would, in my view, be more likely to risk piercing the veil than going brolly. If you go brolly, you are saying that because of the client's decision (with which you disagree) you no longer want to have a Ltd Co. But if you accept an inside determination, you are tacitly accepting the client's decision, which makes it easier for them to say you were wrong to operate outside all along (they'll say that anyway) AND KNEW IT. That's piercing the veil stuff. I believe going brolly with the same agent/client is dangerous but working inside through a Ltd is even more dangerous.
The important thing for you, where your Ltd apparently doesn't really have any funds, is that there really only is one question that matters -- can they pierce the veil. They can retrospectively investigate all they want, but if there's no money in the company and they can't pierce the veil it doesn't hurt you.
Close the company if you can, obviously after VAT/PAYE/Corporation Tax. If you get it closed, it's very, very unlikely they'd ever investigate. But if they stop you closing and investigate but there's no money, then there's no money. Whatever you do, DON'T NEGLECT those three taxes, or they will pierce the veil, and rightly so.
These guys are right that all your plans leave you vulnerable to historical investigation, and would make it harder for you to win if that happens. But in your case, the fact that there's no significant money in your company means that the risk is probably small. You've done enough to lessen the risk that they could pierce the veil, and that probably makes you pretty safe, as long as you pay the taxes you have to and empty the company and shut it down.
Leave a comment: