Freelance Limited Company (FLC) offering from IPSE

[eek]

Its interesting watching the FLC debate on the IPSE forum with people not grasping the fact that anything that may be abused will be abused rapidly..

Worse is when they clearly haven't a clue what they are talking about

[mudskipper]

Its interesting watching the FLC debate on the IPSE forum with people not grasping the fact that anything that may be abused will be abused rapidly..

Worse is when they clearly haven't a clue what they are talking about

I think there's a good debate over there. Some people are more clued up than others - just like any other forum really.

[yakitoo]

I think there's a good debate over there. Some people are more clued up than others - just like any other forum really.

Really, I see a lot of noise and abuse but very little serious debate.

[mudskipper]

Really, I see a lot of noise and abuse but very little serious debate.

Well yes, the s/n ratio leaves a bit to be desired, but people are asking questions and getting answers - in some cases not the answers they want, but it's a useful exercise.

[ASB]

HMRC do have a point in that people are making a decision to contract because they don't have to pay NI. The decision should be based on whether you want to be a contractor and whether you can make enough money.

The intention of the law was that you setup a Ltd and pay yourself a decent salary, but that's not what happened everyone payed themselves a salary of a toilet attendant and the rest in divis.

So I'm afraid this was a loophole and was always coming.

Sort of yes and no. If you look back to the late 70s and early 80s the regime was very different. Certainly no tax motivated incorporation.

All dividend income was subject to a 15% surcharge. And this was in a regime where ni was capped. Both ee and er.

Further, for close companies only, there was the deemed distribution rules. So if you tried retain funds they were treated as paid out as dividends. Further corporation tax was paid also on dividends, though this was reclaimable in a perverse round about way. Usually.

Then various governments relaxed the rules. It suited them in their social engineering projects. It was convenient to ignore the collateral of minor erosion of the public purse whilst claimin we were a nation of entrepreneurs.

There is less need for that now. Though policy is strange. It forces people to work in precisely the way they want to whine about.

Sure its a bit of a loophole. But it is one that has been massively encouraged by policy.

[GB9]

Haven't got time to read all 42 pages. Read the first few and good posts by EEK and JamesBrown that pretty much sum up the IPSE proposal.

One statement in their press release that really stood out and suggests to me that they are completely missing the point was:

"The operating environment for contractors has indeed “become even more hostile” since the FLC was first mooted, according to Simon McVicker, a director of IPSE.

This further underlines “the urgent need to propose a solution” because while IPSE has long protested against IR35, “decision-makers have told us we must provide alternative solutions”.

From what I can see, decision makers have told us we need to pay more tax, not find a different way of paying the same or slightly more than we are now.

At the time I contributed to the House Of Lords inquiry into the use of PSCs, a couple of PCG members told me I should stick with their reply and not deviate from it. They were completely ignored by the committee and are still as clueless now as they were then. They certainly don't represent the contractor community I know.

[mudskipper]

Just a reminder that the survey closes on Sunday, so if you're a member, and haven't responded yet, please do so!

[mudskipper]

Bump - survey closes at midnight.

[TheFaQQer]

The final FLC proposal document, an FAQ and the survey results are now available on the IPSE website. You will need to log in to access the member-only content, though.

[dynamicsaxcontractor]

The final FLC proposal document, an FAQ and the survey results are now available on the IPSE website. You will need to log in to access the member-only content, though.

What a load of b****. Why even bother creating a survey when they already decided what they are going to make of it.

24.5% of everyone doing the survey left negative feedback.
23.8% of people leaving feedback left positive feedback.

Headline of this is that less than 1 in 4 left negative feedback and a staggering quarter of everyone leaving feedback left positive feedback. Talking about making it all up.