CWCSolutions:
I would only suggest you set up a limited company if you think you will be working for at least a full year as Limited company accounts are completed on a yearly basis and accountants charge a lot for this service of completing limited company accounts.
CWCSolutions:
Limited Company (when we act as your accountant) £24.50 per payment this includes completion of year accounts, tax return, corporation tax return, annual companies house return.
52 weeks @ £24.50 = £1274.
An accountant will do all of the above for around £600.
Mike-C:
Question for CWC, if someone sets themselves up as a Ltd Co. , do they need to register themselves as an employer (even if they’re the only employee) and complete this new "live " PAYE reporting ?
Yes. Takes me 10 minutes a month to complete it.
Stanley Knife:
CWCSolutions:
I would only suggest you set up a limited company if you think you will be working for at least a full year as Limited company accounts are completed on a yearly basis and accountants charge a lot for this service of completing limited company accounts.
CWCSolutions:
Limited Company (when we act as your accountant) £24.50 per payment this includes completion of year accounts, tax return, corporation tax return, annual companies house return.
52 weeks @ £24.50 = £1274.
An accountant will do all of the above for around £600.
If the payments (£24.50 )where Monthly it would be just under £300 for the year?
CWCSolutions:
trubster:
Mike-C:
trubster:
Anyways, is it only me that sees this thread as the OP touting for business using “Scare Tactics”?
Up to now i see the OP providing some useful info, as you have used. The post has not gone unnoticed by me and the rest of the team though./quote]
I have learned something new from this post, I was unaware of the new legislation, BUT then to go on and post rates and offer to “Help” for £12.50 a week is where the thread starts to bring out my suspicious side 
I was not on this forum to scare anyone ~ HMRC defeats Reed in £158m temps’ tax case. Who will be next?
I certainly see it as using scare tactics to sell a system. The sales patter is deafening!
Mike-C:
If the payments (£24.50 )where Monthly it would be just under £300 for the year?
Agreed. How many within the umbrella system choose to be paid monthly?
on Page 7 there is an example of scenario for HGV Drivers. Stating that HGV Drivers are self employed and fall outside the new legislation as long as they are under no supervision, direction or control.
gov.uk/government/uploads/s … amples.pdf
that’s very, very old…
These days most drivers are in constant contact with their employer via mobile phone, vehicle tracking etc.
Employer can even see if the driver has stopped and ask him why, or that he is speeding and tell him to slow down. Employer is told every time the trailer doors are opened.
Most truck drivers are, like it or not, employees.
Not before time, HMRC is coming in this year to clean the industry up.
CWCSolutions:
on Page 7 there is an example of scenario for HGV Drivers. Stating that HGV Drivers are self employed and fall outside the new legislation as long as they are under no supervision, direction or control.
gov.uk/government/uploads/s … amples.pdf
That example is a bit misleading as the driver in that case was actually an owner/driver - ie he was responsible for supplying and maintaining the truck, and that was what constituted a large part of the claimed self-employed status.
You could be right GasGas, the important factors seem to be Supervision, Direction & Control, 3 important aspects that technology is either removing from the driver or putting less onus on them to worry about.
For those like me to lazy to keep clicking on the link heres the example, reformatted a bit for an easier read and better critique:
HGV Driver.
Harry is a qualified HGV Driver who holds a Category C&E licence. A furniture manufacturing company in Manchester cont acts the employment business and asks them to supply a fully qualified HGV driver to their factory, to make a delivery of furniture to a customer. The engagement is for one day only. The employment business contacts Harry who is offered the engagement and told to report to the factory at 8.00am the following Monday. Scenario 1 Harry arrives at the furniture factory as instructed and meets the distribution manager, who shows Harry the HGV he will be driving. Harry is told he is to deliver an order of furniture to a customer in Edinburgh that same day and it is up to Harry to decide how he will make the delivery in that he can choose his delivery route.
The only requirements placed on Harry are that he takes the mandatory rest breaks applicable to a HGV driver, completes the delivery before the customers shop closes at 5.00PM and the phone’s the Managing Director afterwards to confirm the de livery is complete. Harry is given the customer’s address and the furniture company’s staff then load all of the furniture onto the HGV. Harry chooses the route he will take and sets off on his delivery. He arrives at the customer’s address at 3.30PM. The customer unloads the furniture from the HGV while Harry telephone’s the Managing Direct or to advise the delivery has been completed.
Harry returns the HGV to the clients and after the client has checked the HGV and confirmed all is in order, Harry’s engagement for that client has now ended. In this scenario, Harry has not been subject to (or to a right of) any form of supervision as to the manner in which he provided his services. Nobody was present to supervise or direct him whilst he made the delivery, nor was anyone doing this from afar. The only form of direction Harry received was being told where to make the delivery; it did not extend to telling Harry the manner in which he must make that delivery. Harry was not subject to (or to a right of ) control from anybody as to the manner in which he provided his services. He had the freedom to choose how he would make the delivery himself without anyone telling him (or having a right to tell him) how he must do it. Being told he must take rest breaks is a mandatory regulation for health and safety purposes and is recorded on tacographs regardless as to whether the worker is employed or self-employed.
HMRC does not regard telling a person they must abide by such mandatory regulations will result in that person being subject to (or to a right of) supervision, direction or control as to the manner in which they provide their services. The Agency legislation will not apply in this scenario.
Scenario 2.
Harry arrives at the client’s furniture factory and meets with the Distribution Manager, who shows Harry the Company HGV th at he will be driving. Harry is then told he is to deliver furniture to customers in Sheffield, Birmingham, Nottingham and Liverpool that same day. Harry is told he must call the Distribution Manager after each delivery and report back to the factory when all deliveries are complete, when he must submit the relevant paperwork. Harry’s delivery schedule and route are pre- determined by the client, which dictates th e order of the deliveries & states Harry must take the appropriate rest breaks.
The Distribution Manager tells Harry he must supervise the loading and unloading of his HGV, making sure all items on the delivery note are loaded and safely secured be fore transit. Harry must also ensure the customers sign the delivery orders to confirm the receipt of their goods. Harry is also told he must check and sign a declaration that his HGV is in roadworthy condition before starting his deliveries. Harry is also told he must follow the traffic reports and if he encounters any disruptions he must call them, as the client may need to change the order of deliveries and decide what alternative route Harry must take. The client contacts Harry every 2 hours to establish his progress and make sure the deliveries are being made in the specified order. Harry commences the deliveries when travelling to his first delivery the client contacts Harry and tells him the order of deliveries has been changed and that he is to change his scheduled second delivery to the last delivery of the day.
Harry completes all deliveries as dictated; he obtains the required customer signatures for all deliveries received and reports back to the factory afterwards, where he submits his completed paperwork. Harry’s engagement with that client is now complete. In this scenario the client has given Harry direction as to how he must do his work by stipulating the order of deliver es and changing that order of deliveries. Harry has also been subject to control as to the manner in which he did his work in that he was required to complete and submit paperwork, supervise the loading and unloading and report back to the client when each de livery was made. Harry had no freedom to choose how the job would be done, this was all dictated to him and he had specific procedures he must follow throughout.
Harry was also supervised throughout by the client telephoning him every 2 hours to establish his progress and ensure he was providing his services in the manner required. In this scenario Harry has been subject to supervision, direction a nd control as to the manner in which he provided his services. The agency legislation will apply here, provided the other conditions of the legislation are also met.
The weak link in the second scenario is ‘Supervision’ that Harry is called every 2 hours to find out his progress, this is unlikely to happen in the real world.
That is another one to add to the argument of “Take your break at Tosco’s RDC”. I am free to take my break as I choose. Calling in is a courtesy rather than a requirement.
Dipper_Dave:
The weak link in the second scenario is ‘Supervision’ that Harry is called every 2 hours to find out his progress, this is unlikely to happen in the real world.
No, in real life it would be a planner every 8 minutes or every time he’s taken an unexpected road “off route” as defined by a cheapo satnav that doesn’t filter out low bridges and country lanes… 
Increasingly, even if the driver is not aware of it, his whereabouts and behaviour are being monitored.
If you drive a new MAN on manufacturer’s contract hire, for instance, then MAN’s managing director can see how many mpg your truck does and whether or not the oil needs topping up. He checks up on how the various trucks are doing on his iPad while he has his breakfast.
The argument that a truck driver, working for a company and driving the company’s truck, is not being supervised by his employer really won’t hold water anymore.
I know loads of agency drivers who, on their return to the depot, have been summoned to the office for a ‘debrief’ because the traffic manager wants to know why they were stopped for five minutes on School Street at 8.43 that morning as revealed by the Isotrac.
If anything agency drivers seem to suffer more from this micromanagement than employed drivers do. It’s ludicrous to claim that they are unsupervised.
Unless you own your own truck, and find your own work, buy your own diesel etc, the chances are you are employed in the eyes of HMRC.
Also.
The agency legislation can also apply if anyone has a “right” to subject the worker to supervision, direction and control; even if in practice that “right” has not been exercised.
PAYE it is then…or maybe I can just class my agency income as ‘other earnings’ and act daft.