robbo99.:
Interesting, it’s cost HMRC & therefore Government so much money that it’s only taken over 20 years to fully enforce IR35 in the private sector, beggars belief.
Truck drivers are just a small part of it though. A lot of people affected by IR35 will be good solid Tory voters, the IT crowd for instance, drawing office or engineers. Well remunerated professionals but not adverse to the tax avoidance afforded by “self employment” even though they’ve been in the same job 20 years!
Sent from my R19 using Tapatalk
Granted, truck drivers are only a small part of it, but having the legislation at their fingertips since April 2000, HMRC had the powers to enforce it fully, not only on the public sector, (which they did) but also on the private sector, strangely they chose not to enforce it en masse on this sector. If it were down to HMRC /Government losing a fortune based on the back of a ■■■ packet calculations by the ultimate black or white Conor, then enforcement would have been much sooner, there is most definitely a bigger picture here. Politics is a strange beast.
Its simple really, they had the power since 2000 but that meant them investigating each person individually. Being a Govt dept it takes a while for the penny to drop that there was no way on earth of them ever doing that. So they bring in legislation that puts the onus on the employing company to make the determination and them being liable for any resulting fines and back tax. This cuts the amount of investigations required and, as has been seen, the companies ■■■■ themselves as it will cost them more so bring in a blanket ban. Its only a matter of time before they bring it in across the board regardless of company size.
Acorn:
You can still be Ltd, pay yourself just under the NI threshold each week which keeps out of NI and tax threshold, and then claim the £4000 tax free dividends before having to paying additional tax. Then most of the other stuff is claimed as business expenses. Thats how I understood it works.
.
I think the idea is to pay yourself just over the NI threshold as salary, with the remainder paid as dividend. You end up paying a pound or two NI but it keeps your contribution record going, for benefit and State pension entitlement purposes.
robbo99.:
Interesting, it’s cost HMRC & therefore Government so much money that it’s only taken over 20 years to fully enforce IR35 in the private sector, beggars belief.
Truck drivers are just a small part of it though. A lot of people affected by IR35 will be good solid Tory voters, the IT crowd for instance, drawing office or engineers. Well remunerated professionals but not adverse to the tax avoidance afforded by “self employment” even though they’ve been in the same job 20 years!
Sent from my R19 using Tapatalk
Granted, truck drivers are only a small part of it, but having the legislation at their fingertips since April 2000, HMRC had the powers to enforce it fully, not only on the public sector, (which they did) but also on the private sector, strangely they chose not to enforce it en masse on this sector. If it were down to HMRC /Government losing a fortune based on the back of a ■■■ packet calculations by the ultimate black or white Conor, then enforcement would have been much sooner, there is most definitely a bigger picture here. Politics is a strange beast.
Its simple really, they had the power since 2000 but that meant them investigating each person individually. Being a Govt dept it takes a while for the penny to drop that there was no way on earth of them ever doing that. So they bring in legislation that puts the onus on the employing company to make the determination and them being liable for any resulting fines and back tax. This cuts the amount of investigations required and, as has been seen, the companies [zb] themselves as it will cost them more so bring in a blanket ban. Its only a matter of time before they bring it in across the board regardless of company size.
“A little while for the penny to drop” yeah right over 20 years? If Government/HMRC had wanted to enforce IR35 fully and with the onus on the end client then they would have done so most certainly from the very early days of the legislation. Funny how they enforced it much sooner on the public sector, maybe that was to get their own house in order, let’s be fair, government bodies certainly couldn’t be seen to be facilitating tax avoidance. Now that would be double standards wouldn’t it?
They will go after a few small fry to test the waters on legality,then if that works,they go after a big multi national, make an example,then hope everyone changes to behave.
biggriffin:
If you can’t see what HMRC are doing then o dear.
They will go after a few small fry to test the waters on legality,then if that works,they go after a big multi national, make an example,then hope everyone changes to behave.
Really? Over 20 years to get were we are today and you state a few small fry to test the water, any idea how big the public sector is and how many disguised employees over the years have served the likes of amongst others HMRC, you know the very tax authority of the land that despises tax avoidance yet have facilitated it themselves.
stu675:
Could someone please change the title to They’re?
Your obviously a grammatically sensitive person
Or they went to school and bothered to get an education. It’s not being grammatically sensitive at all, they’re, their and there are all different words with different meanings.
stu675:
Could someone please change the title to They’re?
Your obviously a grammatically sensitive person
Or they went to school and bothered to get an education. It’s not being grammatically sensitive at all, they’re, their and there are all different words with different meanings.
Well, a lot of us did not go to school and ended up as truck drivers. So, so much for that fancing schooling getting you far in life
stu675:
Could someone please change the title to They’re?
Your obviously a grammatically sensitive person
Or they went to school and bothered to get an education. It’s not being grammatically sensitive at all, they’re, their and there are all different words with different meanings.
There is only one correct spelling and one meaning of the word numpty though…just saying like.
stu675:
Could someone please change the title to They’re?
Your obviously a grammatically sensitive person
Or they went to school and bothered to get an education. It’s not being grammatically sensitive at all, they’re, their and there are all different words with different meanings.
[numpty mode on]
I couldn’t agree more, i find a quick check of the spelling checker before posting often helps us uneducated truck drivers look a little less dumb.
I may be a truck driver with the writing style of a drunk spider on acid but I do know the difference in meanings between There, they’re and their also Watt and what and wear and we’re and where
stu675:
Could someone please change the title to They’re?
Your obviously a grammatically sensitive person
Or they went to school and bothered to get an education. It’s not being grammatically sensitive at all, they’re, their and there are all different words with different meanings.
If you look upwards Conor, you might be able to see the irony in his post passing somewhere over your head.
stu675:
Could someone please change the title to They’re?
Your obviously a grammatically sensitive person
Or they went to school and bothered to get an education. It’s not being grammatically sensitive at all, they’re, their and there are all different words with different meanings.
If you look upwards Conor, you might be able to see the irony in his post passing somewhere over your head.
In fairness, Terry is not the one trying to correct, or finding fault in, others.
.
So long as posts arent ambiguous, I dont see great harm in errors.
.
“Theyre", "there", and "their" are homophones, as are "your" and "youre”, and in conversation we normally have no difficulty with that.
It might be a oui bit off putting to see the wrong use of words, speeling, or granma, but their we are!
but I do know the difference in meanings between There, they’re and their also Watt and what and wear and we’re and where