Originally posted by Anonimouse
View Post
- 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!
Resign from Umbrella
Collapse
X
-
As I said, if you were not employed by them they would not have been able to process previously incurred expenses. If you only intended to have one assignment with them you would not have been entitled to claim travel and subsistence expenses as your workplace would be considered by HMRC to be permanent. The umbrella company should not have been deducting money from you to cover their obligations under a Swedish Derogation contract - can you confirm if these deductions have now been paid back to you? -
The back dating was not from another contract/agency/umbrella it was from them. They didn't process any expenses from the start of the contract, then wouldn't back date.
I did intend to have other contracts thru them as the agency has plenty of work, but after bringing home just over 50% of my earnings every week I just can't afford to, especially as that contract was at a lower than normal rate, but as it was for only for 3 months I foolishly took it as my original contract had been put back.Comment
-
What tax code was used? If your rate was lower than normal I cannot really see how you could have had such a low take home.Originally posted by Anonimouse View PostThe back dating was not from another contract/agency/umbrella it was from them. They didn't process any expenses from the start of the contract, then wouldn't back date.
I did intend to have other contracts thru them as the agency has plenty of work, but after bringing home just over 50% of my earnings every week I just can't afford to, especially as that contract was at a lower than normal rate, but as it was for only for 3 months I foolishly took it as my original contract had been put back.Comment
-
I have no idea what tax code they used, they didn't use the P45 I offered, the rate was lower than normal, but the expenses higher so I was expecting to bring home less but not nearly half.Comment
-
Comment
-
Someone isn't cut out of the this being employed malarkey.Originally posted by LisaContractorUmbrella View PostThe tax code used and tax paid will be on your payslip.'CUK forum personality of 2011 - Winner - Yes really!!!!
Comment
-
Comment
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- IT contractor demand lunged towards growth in April 2026 May 13 04:48
- What does PGMOL’s win over HMRC mean for contractors? May 12 07:25
- Contractors eyeing mortgages ‘unrealistic about BoE’s 3.75% hold decision’ May 11 07:50
- The fake job problem is getting worse. Are contractors a particularly easy target? May 8 07:49
- Government policy on freelancing is stopping the contractor model from doing its thing May 7 08:12
- Contractors, can the new HMRC loan charge settlement opportunity reduce your bill? May 6 07:51
- PGMOL’s ‘not finely balanced’ win over HMRC could be ‘persuasive’ in IR35 cases May 5 07:10
- Is Reporting Company Payments to Participators a concerning consultation for contractors? Apr 29 07:38
- Now it’s finally here, how is HMRC Joint & Several Liability risk being managed, and is payment control the holy grail? Apr 28 06:55
- How Managed Service Providers (MSPs) are hit by HMRC’s Joint & Several Liability Apr 27 06:08


Comment