Clarity is back as an FCSA member

[eek]

See https://www.fcsa.org.uk/fcsa-member/clarity-umbrella/

[Dorkeaux]

I don't understand..

The FCSA page says they are UK based. True, but I can see on the Companies House website that they are owned by Quitron Holdings (a Uk company) that in turn is owned by Quitron Ltd, a Cypriot company.

So, is it risky for contractors to use them if the ultimate owner is based in Cyprus?

The FCSA is not a government body, of course.
Did they put them on the list to avoid the legal threats?

I'm in the market for an umbrella company, but really not interested in HRMC coming after me because I've raised some sort of red flag.

[eek]

I don't understand..

The FCSA page says they are UK based. True, but I can see on the Companies House website that they are owned by Quitron Holdings (a Uk company) that in turn is owned by Quitron Ltd, a Cypriot company.

So, is it risky for contractors to use them if the ultimate owner is based in Cyprus?

The FCSA is not a government body, of course.
Did they put them on the list to avoid the legal threats?

I'm in the market for an umbrella company, but really not interested in HRMC coming after me because I've raised some sort of red flag.

You have a number of misunderstandings there

1) The end owner isn't that significant - that is just where profits go if any are made - what really matters is where the money is stored, where the umbrella does it's work and who is in charge...
2) FCSA is a Private company limited by guarantee without share capital owned by it's members.
3) Read between the lines ( I know slightly more and have suspicions but that is speculation and not for here while there are potential court cases).

But I know that Clarity / Lucy are 100% honest and that all payments will be taxed 100% correctly but it's up to you as to whether you use them or someone else.

Edit - were it me I would be happy to use Clarity up to the point Lucy left or they moved software provider...

[Protagoras]

I'm in the market for an umbrella company, but really not interested in HRMC coming after me because I've raised some sort of red flag.

Whatever umbrella company anyone chooses to use, there's some level of risk since at the end of the day a third party is handling one's money and taxes.

When left with no choice but umbrella 'employment' I'd say that one should
- press for minimum credit terms and chase late payments without delay
- check pay statements carefully
- check on HMRC's website that payments have been remitted
- setup a companies house notification for any changes to the umbrella company

There are arguments that the April '26 JSL legislation changes will reduce employees' potential liability on the tax side.

[eek]

Whatever umbrella company anyone chooses to use, there's some level of risk since at the end of the day a third party is handling one's money and taxes.

When left with no choice but umbrella 'employment' I'd say that one should
- press for minimum credit terms and chase late payments without delay
- check pay statements carefully
- check on HMRC's website that payments have been remitted
- setup a companies house notification for any changes to the umbrella company

There are arguments that the April '26 JSL legislation changes will reduce employees' potential liability on the tax side.

There are no way that a legitimate umbrella worker would have any problems prior to April 26 let alone afterwards - the only way you would be is if you intentionally entered a scheme and continued to use it after your first payslip revealed a large untaxed payment.

Also HMRC won't show that payments have been remitted your individual tax account at HMRC will show what the RTI report told HMRC, just make sure it matches your payslip...

[jamesbrown]

I would be happy to use Clarity up to the point Lucy left or they moved software provider...

Ah, but that could now change overnight as Lucy is no longer a person of significant control. The ultimate owner does matter. Also, I can't say that anyone comes out of this debacle looking great. Personally, I would think carefully about whether you want to hassle. Until recent events, I would've always recommended Clarity and used them myself if I were ever in the unfortunate position of needing an Umbrella, but I don't think I would anymore. Damage is done, IMHO.

[Protagoras]

Also HMRC won't show that payments have been remitted your individual tax account at HMRC will show what the RTI report told HMRC, just make sure it matches your payslip..

That may be the case, but it's not what it appears to say on the tin!

HMRC's website, under 'current year' has a link that actually says "Check Payments Received from <employer>"

Clicking that link takes me to a page headed "Taxable income from <employer>"
with text at the foot of a table that says "Your employer sent the individual and total amounts in the table above."

I'd certainly argue that as a taxpayer, I'm entitled to take that at face value.

[eek]

That may be the case, but it's not what it appears to say on the tin!

HMRC's website, under 'current year' has a link that actually says "Check Payments Received from "

Clicking that link takes me to a page headed "Taxable income from "
with text at the foot of a table that says "Your employer sent the individual and total amounts in the table above."

I'd certainly argue that as a taxpayer, I'm entitled to take that at face value.

As an employee RTI does mean payment to HMRC because and I will refer to this article https://contractoruk.com/news/why-js...just-wont-work neither of the comments below are true..

• the individual knew that the employer had 'wilfully failed' to deduct the PAYE, or
• the PAYE was due in relation to a 'notional payment' to the individual (possibly such as might arise under some types of 'disguised remuneration' arrangement).

And because neither are true The umbrella retaining £5000 in PAYE / Employee NI and not paying it to HMRC is an issue between HMRC and the umbrella's administrator / liquidator not between HMRC and the worker.

And so HMRC are correct in saying RTI report is equivalent of the tax being paid.

Now I suspect one thing that will be discussed very often in the near future is the impact of PSLs were entry is based on the length of period an umbrella is willing to use the VAT money to pay the worker and the RTI bill as referenced in https://www.freelanceinformer.com/ne...apse-owing-2m/ and I mention that because the Honest Payroll was not paying the VAT bill and SafeRec didn't care about it.

[Protagoras]

Now I suspect one thing that will be discussed very often in the near future is the impact of PSLs were entry is based on the length of period an umbrella is willing to use the VAT money to pay the worker and the RTI bill as referenced in https://www.freelanceinformer.com/ne...apse-owing-2m/ and I mention that because the Honest Payroll was not paying the VAT bill and SafeRec didn't care about it.

And, of course, most of the VAT would have been paid had the 'employees' been working as actual contractors via LtdCos.

[cojak]

See https://www.fcsa.org.uk/fcsa-member/clarity-umbrella/

What a surprise!