IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> PAYE, Why Can't I opt out and then pay 1% tax?
On the edge
post Jun 22 2012, 08:28 PM
Post #21


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 7,847
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98



Can't quite understand why the IR35(?) rules for contractors tax aren't applied. After all the 'performers' are just contracting with a broadcaster or such like. So is the BBC complicit?


--------------------
Know your place!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dannyboy
post Jun 22 2012, 08:41 PM
Post #22


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,056
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Bouvetøya
Member No.: 51



QUOTE (TallDarkAndHandsome @ Jun 22 2012, 12:14 PM) *
I mean if its good enough for the Super Rich.... Now where is that off-shore tax haven?

angry.gif

Carr earns at least £3.3 million a year. On that 3.3 million he paid 1% tax, or £33000.00

That is more than I earn in a year....
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Simon Kirby
post Jun 22 2012, 08:47 PM
Post #23


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,326
Joined: 20-July 10
From: Wash Common
Member No.: 1,011



QUOTE (On the edge @ Jun 22 2012, 09:28 PM) *
Can't quite understand why the IR35(?) rules for contractors tax aren't applied. After all the 'performers' are just contracting with a broadcaster or such like. So is the BBC complicit?

I have absolutely no idea if this is right, but my gut feeling is that tax law has become so hopelessly complex that if you can afford a good accountant you can always find a way around paying. The government call them "loopholes", but that's just spin to cover their embarrassment that they're not able to collect the tax they'd like to. The government are to introduce a new law to close some of these loopholes which basically allows the government to interpret the words of any piece of tax legislation in whatever way is most convenient for them - and this is an appallingly dangerous lurch away from the rule of law - isn't this what Magna Carta was about?


--------------------
Right an injustice - give Simon Kirby his allotment back!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Jun 22 2012, 09:09 PM
Post #24


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,902
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (dannyboy @ Jun 22 2012, 09:41 PM) *
Carr earns at least £3.3 million a year. On that 3.3 million he paid 1% tax, or £33000.00

That is more than I earn in a year....

Of course, the subtext to all this, is because of Carr's lawyers, governments are going to be less inclined to invest in similar projects again. So the entertainment industry loses out as well.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JeffG
post Jun 23 2012, 11:43 AM
Post #25


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,762
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 56



I would imagine that IR35 would only apply if the BBC supplied him with a script and told him to read it. IR35 only applies if the contractor is given specific tasks to do, in the same way as an employee would be.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lordtup
post Jun 23 2012, 11:54 AM
Post #26


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 554
Joined: 27-June 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 164



QUOTE (GMR @ Jun 22 2012, 08:47 PM) *
Because they've got the money, you haven't. Money opens doors and tickles the odd maiden... the poor or middle classes are just sheep, ready to follow when the government click their fingers. That is life Jim, but not as the rich know it. laugh.gif


Just for the record sheep are pretty intelligent animals compared to some of their mammalian contemporaries , after all when did you last here of one paying tax or being exposed in the tabloid press for nefarious activities. wink.gif


--------------------
Rem tene verba sequentur
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Jun 23 2012, 11:56 AM
Post #27


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,902
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (JeffG @ Jun 23 2012, 12:43 PM) *
I would imagine that IR35 would only apply if the BBC supplied him with a script and told him to read it. IR35 only applies if the contractor is given specific tasks to do, in the same way as an employee would be.

That doesn't make sense to me. When would someone not be give specific tasks to do? I thought IR35 applied where you worked exclusively for an organisation.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
On the edge
post Jun 23 2012, 02:58 PM
Post #28


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 7,847
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98



QUOTE (dannyboy @ Jun 22 2012, 09:41 PM) *
Carr earns at least £3.3 million a year. On that 3.3 million he paid 1% tax, or £33000.00

That is more than I earn in a year....


Suspect he just gets, whilst you really do earn!

Is he really that good? Will he be hosting shows into his 80's? The answer to his problem is in our hands.


--------------------
Know your place!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
On the edge
post Jun 23 2012, 03:04 PM
Post #29


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 7,847
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98



QUOTE (JeffG @ Jun 23 2012, 12:43 PM) *
I would imagine that IR35 would only apply if the BBC supplied him with a script and told him to read it. IR35 only applies if the contractor is given specific tasks to do, in the same way as an employee would be.


Interesting take. Have employed several IT contractors over the years, often where they work for me on a say two or three day week basis oiver a period. IR35 always applies. I tell them what I want - but certainly can't tell them how to do it! So, unless they have the certificates - tax is taken.


--------------------
Know your place!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cognosco
post Jun 23 2012, 03:08 PM
Post #30


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,452
Joined: 31-October 10
Member No.: 1,212



QUOTE (lordtup @ Jun 22 2012, 02:14 PM) *
If , and it's a big if , the loopholes were closed and everyone paid the same rate of tax then there would be no need for accountants ( higher unemployment ) no incentive to work harder or desire to be altruistic.

I bet there is not a single one of us who would not jump at the chance of paying less tax if we could get away with it especially when we witness how it is wasted but that's human nature I'm afraid .

Personally I think there are a lot more pressing matters than a few bob missing from the fiscal coffers . wink.gif


The government know the loopholes are there of course, but only for some to use....why do you think they were left there for? rolleyes.gif


--------------------
Vexatious Candidate?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
On the edge
post Jun 23 2012, 03:10 PM
Post #31


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 7,847
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98



QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Jun 22 2012, 10:09 PM) *
Of course, the subtext to all this, is because of Carr's lawyers, governments are going to be less inclined to invest in similar projects again. So the entertainment industry loses out as well.


Fcinating point! Suggest worthy of a thread on its own. You are probably quite right, however - the entertainment industry is an oligopoly at best in the UK, in my view fuelled by the size and influence of the public service broadcaster. We have dozens of 'performing arts colleges'and such like, but how often do we see really new and different talent? Of course, they are onlty delivering what we the publoic want....!


--------------------
Know your place!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Jun 23 2012, 04:00 PM
Post #32


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,902
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (On the edge @ Jun 23 2012, 04:10 PM) *
Fcinating point! Suggest worthy of a thread on its own. You are probably quite right, however - the entertainment industry is an oligopoly at best in the UK, in my view fuelled by the size and influence of the public service broadcaster. We have dozens of 'performing arts colleges'and such like, but how often do we see really new and different talent? Of course, they are onlty delivering what we the publoic want....!

The merits of this particular enterprise is debatable, but in this case, the tax 'cheats' could be seen as sh!ting in their own nest.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
On the edge
post Jun 23 2012, 04:02 PM
Post #33


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 7,847
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98



QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Jun 23 2012, 05:00 PM) *
The merits of this particular enterprise is debatable, but in this case, the tax 'cheats' could be seen as sh!ting in their own nest.


Very true!!


--------------------
Know your place!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JeffG
post Jun 23 2012, 04:14 PM
Post #34


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,762
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 56



Discussion about IR35 rules here. Points 4, 5 and 6 are particularly interesting. Thank goodness I don't have to bother with that sort of stuff any more! The revenue want to treat (and tax) contractors as employees, but conveniently ignore the fact that they don't get paid holidays or sickness, and have to pay both employer's and employee's NI contributions.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Biker1
post Jun 24 2012, 08:37 AM
Post #35


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 5,064
Joined: 26-May 09
Member No.: 103



QUOTE (JeffG @ Jun 22 2012, 03:27 PM) *
No you don't and no you don't.

Explain please.
How do I get off PAYE?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JeffG
post Jun 24 2012, 09:04 AM
Post #36


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,762
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 56



QUOTE (Biker1 @ Jun 24 2012, 09:37 AM) *
Explain please.
How do I get off PAYE?

Either work for yourself, or retire! smile.gif. Seriously, mitigating tax liability is not a crime - it's only the excessive amount that was avoided in this case that's caused all the fuss. Perhaps there will be another knee-jerk reaction by the government akin to the Dangerous Dogs Act that affects more moderate schemes.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Biker1
post Jun 24 2012, 09:10 AM
Post #37


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 5,064
Joined: 26-May 09
Member No.: 103



QUOTE (JeffG @ Jun 24 2012, 10:04 AM) *
Either work for yourself, or retire! smile.gif

Which is what I said and you refuted??? blink.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jayjay
post Jun 24 2012, 09:51 AM
Post #38


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,012
Joined: 22-September 09
Member No.: 357



QUOTE (JeffG @ Jun 24 2012, 10:04 AM) *
Either work for yourself, or retire! smile.gif. Seriously, mitigating tax liability is not a crime - it's only the excessive amount that was avoided in this case that's caused all the fuss. Perhaps there will be another knee-jerk reaction by the government akin to the Dangerous Dogs Act that affects more moderate schemes.


Why would you be able to get off paying PAYE if you retire?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Jun 24 2012, 09:56 AM
Post #39


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,902
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (Jayjay @ Jun 24 2012, 10:51 AM) *
Why would you be able to get off paying PAYE if you retire?

Because you wouldn't be working! tongue.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Biker1
post Jun 24 2012, 10:02 AM
Post #40


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 5,064
Joined: 26-May 09
Member No.: 103



QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Jun 24 2012, 10:56 AM) *
Because you wouldn't be working! tongue.gif

Don't you pay it on a pension?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 29th March 2024 - 06:43 AM