Reply to: Budget 16th March 2016

[DonkeyRhubarb]

That figures, but.. what kind of scheme have you in mind?

I was only joking of course. Using a scheme these days is

[SueEllen]

Oh, he's a LONG-TERM kind of guy, didn't you listen?

You mean he doesn't want to be attacked when he's PM like Brown about his pensions raid and abolishing the 10p tax rate.

[CornishYarg]

So, anyone using a tax avoidance scheme, rather than a Ltd Co, will not be affected.

That figures, but.. what kind of scheme have you in mind?

[WordIsBond]

There are more people over 40 than under and it's the people between 40-54 who put the most in their pensions. This age group also votes....

Oh, he's a LONG-TERM kind of guy, didn't you listen?

People over 40 can't even open a LISA, right? So what's he going to do? Why, take pension relief away for people under 40 -- and then the next year, for those under 41, and so on. "I'm not taking pensions away or changing anything for anyone who is even remotely close to retirement. They can keep their pension." But the savings will go into his forecasts, etc.

[SueEllen]

Of course that is what they are doing.

And the Lifetime ISA is setting up to kill private pensions. Next year or the year after, they'll say, "Well, everyone on basic rate can do just as well or better with the Lifetime ISA, so it's really only the rich who are using private pensions now. They don't need tax relief."

There are more people over 40 than under and it's the people between 40-54 who put the most in their pensions. This age group also votes....

[DaveB]

Yep.

In the past, the Treasury have been told that making it work like this would kill the industry. So this is their chance to show that they were right and everyone else was wrong.

A lot will hinge on the clients and agencies reaction to being liable for employers NI and collecting PAYE.

It will also depend on exactly what the employment status tests turn out like. For all that people loathed them, the BET's were so badly put together than most people could score a medium or low risk with a little bit of effort, and could back it up with status reviews from QDOS et al.

[TheFaQQer]

I wonder if they are clamping down on contractors in the public sector, see how it goes, see if it works, if it is effective, with a view to extend it to the private sector in the future?

Yep.

In the past, the Treasury have been told that making it work like this would kill the industry. So this is their chance to show that they were right and everyone else was wrong.

[WordIsBond]

I wonder if they are clamping down on contractors in the public sector, see how it goes, see if it works, if it is effective, with a view to extend it to the private sector in the future?

Of course that is what they are doing.

And the Lifetime ISA is setting up to kill private pensions. Next year or the year after, they'll say, "Well, everyone on basic rate can do just as well or better with the Lifetime ISA, so it's really only the rich who are using private pensions now. They don't need tax relief."

[Waldorf]

I wonder if they are clamping down on contractors in the public sector, see how it goes, see if it works, if it is effective, with a view to extend it to the private sector in the future?

[DonkeyRhubarb]

From April 2017, where the public sector engages an off-payroll worker through their own limited company, that body (or the recruiting agency if the public sector body engages through one) will become responsible for determining whether the rules should apply, and for paying the right tax.

So, anyone using a tax avoidance scheme, rather than a Ltd Co, will not be affected.

[matzie]

Things I've spotted in the docs so far -

* public sector responsible for determining contractor status and for paying the tax - from April 2017

"From April 2017, where the public sector engages an off-payroll worker through their own limited company, that body (or the recruiting agency if the public sector body engages through one) will become responsible for determining whether the rules should apply, and for paying the right tax. This strengthens the public sector’s role in ensuring that the workers it engages comply with the rules."

* more 'consultation'

"The government also recognises that the current rules are seen as complex and can create uncertainty. It will therefore consult on a simpler set of tests and online tools that will provide a clear answer as to whether and when the rules should apply."

* Loans to participators tax rate raised from 25% to 32.5% - from April 2016

"Budget 2016 announces an increase in the rate of tax payable by close companies under the loans to participators rules so that it continues to mirror the higher rate of dividend tax. The loans to participators tax rate will be increased from 25% to 32.5% in April 2016, with effect for loans, advances and arrangements made on or after 6 April 2016."

https://www.gov.uk/government/public...rking-people-1

Section 3.30 and following

[westtester]

Found this in the main Budget document.



Off-payroll engagement in the public sector

1.148 Some individuals who work through their own limited company are undertaking jobs that would ordinarily mean they are employees of the business that they are working for. In those circumstances, existing legislation on off-payroll working requires them to pay broadly the same taxes as employees. However, non-compliance with these rules is costing the taxpayer around £440 million a year – and these costs are rising.

1.149 Public sector bodies have a responsibility to taxpayers to ensure that the people working for them are paying the right tax. From April 2017, where the public sector engages an off-payroll worker through their own limited company, that body (or the recruiting agency if the public sector body engages through one) will become responsible for determining whether the rules should apply, and for paying the right tax. This strengthens the public sector’s role in ensuring that the workers it engages comply with the
rules.

1.150 The government also recognises that the current rules are seen as complex and can create uncertainty. It will therefore consult on a simpler set of tests and online tools that will provide a clear answer as to whether and when the rules should apply.

[bluemonkey71]

The Chancellor announces a series of actions to tackle tax avoidance and evasion totalling £12bn, including moves to end the use of "personal service companies" by public sector employees to minimise their tax liabilities. A number of TV personalities have faced criticism for their use of the tax loophole.

[MarkT]

So if you can think of a tax regulation that would cover all these types of IT contractors without a loophole. Then ensure it covers every other type of skilled professional you can think of e.g. engineers, HR, accountants, lawyers, marketers, then you should be the Chancellor not Gidiot.

Nope

But I still think I'd make a better fist of it......to be fair, my dog could make a better fist of it, and he's scared of cardboard....

[SueEllen]

Id love to be wrong!!!!!

You have to remember the world of self-employed and contractors covers more than just us.

Even if you consider IT contractors there are those who work direct, have more than one contract at a time, subcontract work out, do fixed price projects and/or have employees.

So if you can think of a tax regulation that would cover all these types of IT contractors without a loophole. Then ensure it covers every other type of skilled professional you can think of e.g. engineers, HR, accountants, lawyers, marketers, then you should be the Chancellor not Gidiot.