Avoidance

An avoidance scheme designed to exploit the employment allowance has been deemed by tax officials to be ineffective.

HMRC intend to challenge all uses of the arrangement, which the department claims “simply does not work”. Users are urged to withdraw.

What impact does public perception of avoidance have on advisers?

Law Society warns over anti-avoidance measures

Spritebeam Ltd, Prowting Ltd & CRC v CRC & Versteegh Ltd, Upper Tribunal

S Price, J Myers, J Lucas v CRC, Upper Tribunal

HMRC have clarified their position on the new intermediary reporting requirements for umbrella company workers, following enquiries from the Association of Professional Staffing Companies (APSCo).

The taxman’s system requires intermediaries to select from a list the reason why PAYE has not been applied. There are six categories:

A. Self-employed
B. Partnership
C. Limited liability partnership
D. Limited company
E. Non-UK engagement
F. Another party operated PAYE on the worker’s payments

A Savva & others v CRC, Upper Tribunal

Advisers must prepare for the challenges that lie ahead

Inside Track Productions LLP & others v CRC, Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber)

PAC also critical of reliefs cost data

Plan revived to tackle offshore evasion

Employment experts have accused HMRC of misleading businesses about the operating cost of IR35.

Statistics released by the department yesterday suggest UK firms spend an annual total of £16m on administrating the controversial anti-avoidance measure, which is aimed at ensuring freelancers working through their own limited companies pay income tax and National Insurance at a levels similar to those of regular employees.