Should Gary Barlow return his OBE?

Bear said:
In the example of a contractor, they are expected to pay 20% corp tax and 13.8% employers NI above what someone on PAYE would have to pay, for potentially doing the same job as someone you are sitting next to. Personally I think it is wrong.
Click to expand...

presumably they have chosen the Ltd company route to benefit from the ability to pay a lower rate of tax on dividends
 
Easyrider said:
Eh?

There aren't jobs full stop.
Click to expand...

Yes there is. Loads. In civils you're constantly struggling to get good people. 'Good' people. Not the average worthless ****heads.

The more I have to deal with hiring people, the more I'm realizing why unemployment is such a big issue. A lot of the unemployed aren't cut out to do actual work. Everyone wants to sit in an office and play with a computer and a company issued iPhone 5. That's before they leave work at 3pm driving away in a company issued car.

That's just one industry. Who knows what goes on elsewhere. Probably more of the same.
 
Bear said:
In the example of a contractor, they are expected to pay 20% corp tax and 13.8% employers NI above what someone on PAYE would have to pay, for potentially doing the same job as someone you are sitting next to. Personally I think it is wrong.
Click to expand...


Yet the contractor should be on an hourly rate that's x10 that of the PAYE worker.

I'll give you an example;

Project Engineer I work with. £450 a day. He's a contractor. Pretty much booked up till 2016.

Project Engineer working for a very very large civils multinational. £35k a year ...
 
elmarko said:
Assuming the wages are similar then yes that would be unfair. (assuming that's what somebody on PAYE on the same salary would pay).

In my line of work, contractors are paid double what the permanent members of staff are paid for the same job, making the direct percentage comparisons not quite so simple (as if the perm staff members were on that salary that would be paying more as a percentage of total deductions).
Click to expand...

The level of wages is to cover the fact you have no employment rights nor benefits. If you took the rolled up cost of employing a permanent member of staff the cost would be pretty much the same. I know it was in my last place of work and it is in my current place of work.
 
Last edited:
I can't blame him for his "accounting" If I could get away with it I would and I'm sure others would too.
 
regulus said:
Yet the contractor should be on an hourly rate that's x10 that of the PAYE worker.

I'll give you an example;

Project Engineer I work with. £450 a day. He's a contractor. Pretty much booked up till 2016.

Project Engineer working for a very very large civils multinational. £35k a year ...
Click to expand...

Ask your project manager what the charge out rate for your labour is for that project and it would be pretty close if not the same as what the contractor is getting taking into account what the agency is getting.

Where I work, everything is budgeted by project. Everyone has to book their time to the projects they work on. A permanent staff member costs the project £55 per hour for a comparable job and it's pretty much the same for me with the agency fee on top of my hourly rate.
 
Last edited:
Bear said:
In the example of a contractor, they are expected to pay 20% corp tax and 13.8% employers NI above what someone on PAYE would have to pay, for potentially doing the same job as someone you are sitting next to. Personally I think it is wrong.
Click to expand...
You're not going to pay both those, are you? If you paid out all your profits as dividends, then you'd have paid ~20% corporation tax on the profits. If you pay yourself everything in salary, then you'd have to pay the ER's NI, but you'd not have any profit to pay corporation tax on.

In reality, you'd balance the two and usually end up with a far better deal than a normal employee on PAYE.
 
csmager said:
You're not going to pay both those, are you? If you paid out all your profits as dividends, then you'd have paid ~20% corporation tax on the profits. If you pay yourself everything in salary, then you'd have to pay the ER's NI, but you'd not have any profit to pay corporation tax on.

In reality, you'd balance the two and usually end up with a far better deal than a normal employee on PAYE.
Click to expand...

Of course but people are talking about tax avoidance and fairness, my example shows there is an unfairness in the tax system itself which encourages people to avoid tax. You also have to prove you are outside of IR35 to be able to pay yourself in that way.
 
Last edited:
Easyrider said:
Elaborate?

And I don't mean cheap duty free:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

There are various ways to avoid taxation through Government approved schemes such as ISA's (both for cash and avoiding CGT on Investments), AIA's, Asset Transfer, Children's Savings Plans, Gift Aid, PETS, there are also more aggressive ways to avoid taxation..avoiding duty on imports, cash in hand payments not being declared, tips and gifts not being declared, claiming on tax returns for items not directly related to your work, expenses and the list goes on...things people do every day.

Surfer said:
Conflating one action with another. Arguing that both are the same ergo are ok.

Are you and Castiel (by omission as he hasnt further explicated examples) seriously comparing having an ISA with the lengths some companies and people go to to avoid paying tax. e.g. hiring a firm of accountants who orchestrate "income" to come in via a number of tax loophole operations.

One is clearly organised tax avoidance with the intent of NOT paying tax...the other is merely saving money.
Click to expand...

They are in principle the same. The very act of avoidance is to avoid paying tax by using schemes is that if you did not use you would otherwise have to pay tax.

There are plenty of ordinary working-class people that hire accountants and financial advisor's to ensure their tax liability is as low as it can be, these range from the self employed to those with investments and pensions.

If there is a tax loophole that is being aggressively exploited then it is up to the Government agencies responsible to close that loophole and ensure that the tax regime is as robust as possible...tax avoidance as an individual is simply not illegal, neither is it immoral...it is simply addressing your tax liability as effectively and efficiently as possible. You pay the State the amount of tax that you need to..not how much you want to.
 
Last edited:
Bear said:
Of course but people are talking about tax avoidance and fairness, my example shows there is an unfairness in the tax system itself which encourages people to avoid tax. You also have to prove you are outside of IR35 to be able to pay yourself in that way.
Click to expand...

Fairness. Haha, when has the world ever been fair.

 
The funny thing is nobody cared about this stuff before 2009.

Sometimes I find it really frightening what Britain has become when one watches Andre Rieu and all the people around him. Such a different better culture.
 
Dimple said:
But do you now see that he isn't a tax dodger and therefore your OP is void?
Click to expand...

If he wasn't... then that politician or newspaper would be done for slander?

The mere fact he hasn't pursued it further means he is not completely legit.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom