• 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!

What is everyone going to do assuming HMR&C and Osborne get their way?

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #81
    Originally posted by ChimpMaster View Post
    Go direct to the client? Would that count as being 'in business' as opposed to a 'pseudo employee' as HMRC would see it?
    It's a step in the right direction, but I still think we are going to need to show multiple concurrent clients in order to dodge it altogether. What that looks like in practice depends on how they define things in the actual legislation.

    3 contractors invoiceing eachother for a day a month A->B->C->A would give everyone multiple clients, at least on paper.
    "Being nice costs nothing and sometimes gets you extra bacon" - Pondlife.

    Comment


      #82
      Originally posted by AtW View Post
      Yep.

      Canada is supposed to be heavy taxing country ... whole 29% of taxable income over $138,586!!!

      ... and they've got great tax funded services.

      To be fair they've got also local tax - depends on territory where you live, so there is some choice - 10% in Alberta, overall looks like no worse than 40% here.

      Only downside - far away and lots of snow. But if your lifestyle is destroyed by a "pro-business" Tory Scumverment then might as well move.
      Max/Min temps---precipitation---sunshine hours

      London
      Jan: 8C/2C---55mm---61
      Feb: 8C/2C---41mm---78
      Mar: 11C/4C---42mm---114
      Apr: 14C/6C---44mm---168
      May: 18C/9C---49mm---197
      Jun: 21C/12C---45mm---206
      Jul: 24C/14C---45mm---211
      Aug: 23C/14C---50mm---203
      Sep: 20C/11C---49mm---148
      Oct: 16C/8C---69mm---116
      Nov: 11C/5C---59mm---72
      Dec: 8C/3C---55mm---52

      Vancouver
      Jan: 6C/1C---154mm---60
      Feb: 8C/2C---123mm---85
      Mar: 10C/3C---114mm---134
      Apr: 13C/5C---84mm---182
      May: 17C/8C---68mm---231
      Jun: 19C/11C---55mm---229
      Jul: 22C/13C---40mm---295
      Aug: 22C/13C---39mm---268
      Sep: 19C/11C---54mm---199
      Oct: 14C/7C---113mm---125
      Nov: 9C/3C---181mm---64
      Dec: 6C/1C---176mm---56

      London is warmer and much drier, but Vancouver gets an extra 300 hours of sun annually.

      Comment


        #83
        Maybe I'll set up a plan B offering advice to contractors how to proceed.
        Originally posted by MaryPoppins
        I'd still not breastfeed a nazi
        Originally posted by vetran
        Urine is quite nourishing

        Comment


          #84
          Originally posted by DaveB View Post
          It's a step in the right direction, but I still think we are going to need to show multiple concurrent clients in order to dodge it altogether. What that looks like in practice depends on how they define things in the actual legislation.

          3 contractors invoiceing eachother for a day a month A->B->C->A would give everyone multiple clients, at least on paper.
          But what if I invoiced my father in law, a solicitor, for £50 a day consultancy, 1 day a month, then paid it back to him for legal services.....forever...

          I like to sail close to the wind....

          Comment


            #85
            Originally posted by MarkT View Post
            But what if I invoiced my father in law, a solicitor, for £50 a day consultancy, 1 day a month, then paid it back to him for legal services.....forever...

            I like to sail close to the wind....
            This is the kind of stuff that needs to be looked at in detail when we know what the actual outcome is. As I've said before, there will be loopholes. HMRC / HMG are simply not that good at drafting this stuff and there will be far more, and likely far better, people interested in pulling it apart than they can put on creating it to begin with.
            "Being nice costs nothing and sometimes gets you extra bacon" - Pondlife.

            Comment


              #86
              Originally posted by alphadog View Post
              If anyone wants a dogs body to join their team at Lloyd's, I am your man
              Sad to say I got the boot in 2012, cost savings.....

              Comment


                #87
                Originally posted by DaveB View Post
                This is the kind of stuff that needs to be looked at in detail when we know what the actual outcome is. As I've said before, there will be loopholes. HMRC / HMG are simply not that good at drafting this stuff and there will be far more, and likely far better, people interested in pulling it apart than they can put on creating it to begin with.
                Agree completely with that - it could be a storm in a teacup and we don't actually get bitten at all. I think there will be ways around it, because HMRC are utterly incompetent. I know that because I've worked for them before, via SERCO.

                In 2009 my boss there didn't know the different between a FTC and a contractor and asked me to become one, for 5 years. I politely declined indicating why.

                Comment


                  #88
                  Originally posted by DaveB View Post
                  It's a step in the right direction, but I still think we are going to need to show multiple concurrent clients in order to dodge it altogether. What that looks like in practice depends on how they define things in the actual legislation.

                  3 contractors invoiceing eachother for a day a month A->B->C->A would give everyone multiple clients, at least on paper.
                  If they implement this, it's going to be some sort of turnover requirement (e.g. >30% generated from another source on an annual basis), otherwise it wouldn't be worth the Parliamentary parchment it was written on. However, back in the real world, how is this going to work? I currently have two clients, about 85/15, with another coming online at the end of the year (probably 80/15/5). This varies a lot on any given timeframe. Each of those clients are contracted for different periods, one of them for several years. The mix could be different 6 months from now. Also, one or more contracts could be cancelled without notice. You might go into a financial year expecting to pass such a test and come out having failed. There would be no ability to plan.

                  If they are going to develop stupid, arbitrary, tests, they at least need to be easily applied. For example, working from your own premises/WFH would be a straightforward exclusion (aligned with lack of SDC on some level). A test of concurrent clients wouldn't be workable unless it was a straightforward yes/no at the end of the year (i.e. did you have concurrent clients at any point during the year?). In that case, it wouldn't be so much a loophole as a gaping chasm.

                  Comment


                    #89
                    Originally posted by AtW View Post
                    Yep.

                    Canada is supposed to be heavy taxing country ... whole 29% of taxable income over $138,586!!!

                    ... and they've got great tax funded services.

                    To be fair they've got also local tax - depends on territory where you live, so there is some choice - 10% in Alberta, overall looks like no worse than 40% here.
                    Same argument applies to the US. The "top rate of tax" may be 39.6%, but once you add on state and local taxes, it's a lot more than the 47% marginal Tax+NI rate here, especially in the more affluent states/cities.

                    And they have a lot more bands. In some places, the top rate kicks in when earning millions.

                    Comment


                      #90
                      Originally posted by centurian View Post
                      Same argument applies to the US. The "top rate of tax" may be 39.6%, but once you add on state and local taxes, it's a lot more than the 47% marginal Tax+NI rate here, especially in the more affluent states/cities.

                      And they have a lot more bands. In some places, the top rate kicks in when earning millions.
                      But then we have VAT at 20% (more than US sales tax), Council Tax, VAT and Duty on fuel meaning ours costs more than twice the USA.
                      First Law of Contracting: Only the strong survive

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X