Contracting as ltd



You’d have to be very unlucky to be investigated given the cuts at hmrc...they’ve only got about 20 investigators for the entire country.
 
That’s what I thought, under 2 years your pretty much ok I thought
The 2 year thing is a myth, everyone seems to think you’re immune until that point but it’s nothing to do with ir35. I guess that under 2 years your liability would be less if you were investigated.
This is the first ir35 case in 7 years apparently, I don’t think it’s worth being overly concerned just yet.
 
Won’t have had a days holiday or sick pay in that period, or any pension entitlement. Bet that wasn’t taken into account in her tax bill.
would have been taken account of in the daily rate--which is why sickness rate for this type of worker is a mere fraction of public servants
 
2 years is length of time you can claim expenses. Being a TV presenter at the same company doing the same job for 7 years smacks of being a permanent employee.

2 years is length of time you can claim expenses. Being a TV presenter at the same company doing the same job for 7 years smacks of being a permanent employee.

Oh . . And for a publicly funded company too.
 
Last edited:
The silly thing is people who are usualy "forced" to go limited or umbrella would rather be cards in getting the employee benefits like holidays sick etc. Its the employers who they should crack down on not the worker.

Agree. Employers don't want to hire people direct on their books these days.
Easier to hire and fire.

Bollocks. 9 times out of 10 people will take the daily rate.

Bollocks - 9 out of 10???:lol:

Being directly employed gives you a more secure employment as the company who employ you have to play the game with you.
The employee will enjoy better T's & C's, along with paid holidays, free P.P.E., company pension schemes, and in general the knowledge that the company cannot get rid of you at a stroke of a pen.
I for one never contemplated going self-employed or Ltd company, always had my books in with companies.
 
Bollocks - 9 out of 10???:lol:

Being directly employed gives you a more secure employment as the company who employ you have to play the game with you.
The employee will enjoy better T's & C's, along with paid holidays, free P.P.E., company pension schemes, and in general the knowledge that the company cannot get rid of you at a stroke of a pen.
I for one never contemplated going self-employed or Ltd company, always had my books in with companies.

If they are paid proper contract rates 9 out of 10 would take it aye. I'm getting almost double what I'd get as an employee. Granted not everyone gets remunerated correctly and I would take permy if the day rate was poor too.
 
Agree. Employers don't want to hire people direct on their books these days.
Easier to hire and fire.



Bollocks - 9 out of 10???:lol:

Being directly employed gives you a more secure employment as the company who employ you have to play the game with you.
The employee will enjoy better T's & C's, along with paid holidays, free P.P.E., company pension schemes, and in general the knowledge that the company cannot get rid of you at a stroke of a pen.
I for one never contemplated going self-employed or Ltd company, always had my books in with companies.
This ,

Everyone bar one of our lads is a subby.Suits them,suits us.
 

Back
Top