At Shipleys we strive to offer a tailored solution right from the very first phone call
Contractors/Locums
Majority of those who wish to start contract work want to do so for the perceived tax benefits. Whilst tax savings can be significant given the right advice, those looking to move to self employment need to be wary of the many pitfalls – IR35, status issues and income shifting etc to name but a few.
At Shipleys we will help you make the transition from employment to self-employment as painless as possible. We will deal with all the tax and accounts issues that need resolving and we promise to do it swiftly. We will explain honestly and carefully the pros and cons of self employment/sole tradership v. trading through a company and help you decide the best way for you.
If you are a locum, or thinking about becoming one in the near future, talk to us for clear concise advice – we deal with hundreds of locums/ IT contractors each year.
- Free contractor/locum start-up advice
- Paying too much tax? If you haven’t done any planning then you probably are paying over the odds to the Chancellor. Call us for a free tax health-check.
- Sole trader v. company structure – the pros and cons
- IR35 – this affects all locums/contractors trading via a company. Is your business contract IR35 proof? How can you minimise the risk? HMRC is continually attacking Personal Service Companies, how can you stay one step ahead?
- Expenses – are you claiming everything you possibly can?
- Buying a car – which is the best way, personally or through a company?
- Fixed fee accounts, tax returns, VAT (if applicable) and Payroll
- Preferential payment terms can be agreed for start-ups
Latest news & blogs…
Autumn Budget Statement 2023
IN A LARGELY uninspiring speech and, amidst declining inflation rates, the Chancellor’s Autumn Statement delivered some fairly unspectacular tax cuts.
In today’s Shipleys Tax note we give you a snapshot of what you need to know as an employer, self-employed or business.
National Insurance Takes Centre Stage
Following much vaunted speculation post-October’s inflation report, expectations were high for potential reductions in corporation tax, inheritance tax, and National Insurance (NI). The final decision primarily impacted NI, affecting both employees and self-employed individuals. However, the effective dates for these changes vary.
Employee NI Rate Cut from January 2024
Effective from 6 January 2024, the Primary Class 1 main NI rate will decrease from 12% to 10%. This alteration, reminiscent of the mid-year modifications in 2022/23, necessitates payroll software updates. It’s crucial for businesses to ensure these updates are implemented before processing January’s payroll. Note: The rate for earnings above the Upper Threshold remains at 2%.
Significant Changes for Self-Employed NI Contributions from April 2024
Starting 6 April 2024, Class 2 NI contributions, mandatory for the self-employed, will be abolished. Self-employed individuals with profits between £6,725 and £12,570 will maintain access to contributory benefits like the state pension through NI credits without paying contributions. Voluntary Class 2 payments remain an option.
Additionally, the main Class 4 NI rate will be reduced from 9% to 8%.
Extended NI Incentive for Hiring Veterans
The beneficial NI incentive for recruiting veterans is now extended until 2025.
Expansion of Cash Basis Accounting for Self-Employed Businesses
The Autumn Statement also brought some good news for self-employed businesses using cash basis accounting. The turnover limit for this accounting method has been removed. Previously, businesses had to switch to the accruals basis after exceeding £300,000 turnover
Business tax
- Capital allowances – permanent full expensing – Full expensing is now a permanent tax break for companies. The Spring Budget 2023 introduced two new temporary first-year allowances. For expenditure on plant or machinery incurred on or after 1 April 2023 but before 1 April 2026, companies can claim a 100% first-year allowance for main rate expenditure – known as “full expensing” – and a 50% first-year allowance for special rate expenditure. Today’s announcement makes full expensing and the 50% first-year allowance permanent by removing the expiry date of March 2026.
- The two R&D reliefs (RDEC and the SME scheme) to merge from 1 April 2024 – A range of measures on tax reliefs have been announced including enhanced support for Research and Development (R&D) intensive small and medium-sized enterprises, an extension to the ‘sunset date’ for freeport tax reliefs and administrative changes to the creative industry tax reliefs.
- The EIS and VCT schemes are extended for another decade.
- The tax reliefs for Investment Zones and Freeports are extended to ten years.
More to follow.
Want more tax tips and news? Sign up to our newsletter below.
When are Directors liable for unpaid company taxes?
IN THE UK’s corporate realm, the concept of limited liability shields directors from personal accountability for company debts, including tax obligations. However, there are specific instances where HMRC can pierce this corporate veil, seeking recompense directly from directors.
In today’s Shipleys Tax note we outline these rare yet significant circumstances and the potential legislative defences that may be available to company directors.
The Principle of Limited Liability Status
Limited liability maintains a distinct legal separation between the company and its directors. Nevertheless, this shield is not impervious. There are certain situations, often involving serious misconduct or negligence, where directors can find themselves personally liable for the company’s unpaid taxes.
Where Might Directors Face Personal Liability?
Director’s Personal Guarantees
When a director provides a personal guarantee for a company’s debt, they pledge their own assets as security for the loan. This guarantee means that if the company cannot repay its debts, the director’s personal assets can be targeted to recover the amount owed. Similarly, if a director has an outstanding balance in their director’s loan account, which is not settled before the company enters insolvency, they may become personally liable to repay this debt.
Wrongful or Fraudulent Trading
Directors must act responsibly with regard to the company’s financial status. Under insolvency rules, if directors continue to trade when they know the company is insolvent, or if they incur debts without a reasonable prospect of the company being able to repay them, they can be held personally liable for wrongful trading.
Fraudulent trading goes a step further, where directors deliberately set out to defraud creditors. In such cases, the courts can hold directors personally responsible for the company’s debts, resulting in serious legal and financial repercussions.
Tax Evasion or Avoidance
Tax legislation gives HMRC additional powers to hold directors accountable for tax evasion or avoidance. If a director is found to have a history of corporate insolvency, particularly if insolvency has been used as a means to evade or avoid tax liabilities, HMRC can pursue them personally. This legislation aims to deter directors from using insolvency as a tax evasion strategy, ensuring that corporate tax liabilities are met.
Personal Liability Notices (PLNs)
HMRC uses Personal Liability Notices to hold directors personally liable for the non-payment of PAYE or National Insurance Contributions (NIC). These notices are issued when HMRC believes that the non-payment was a result of the director’s neglect or fraudulent behaviour. Once a PLN is issued, directors can face significant personal financial liabilities, which HMRC will actively seek to recover.
Possible Mitigating Factors
When facing action from HMRC for liabilities such as PAYE, NIC, VAT, or Corporation Tax (CT), directors can employ several defences to potentially mitigate or challenge personal liability:
- Lack of Intent: Demonstrating that there was no intention to evade tax payments, that any underpayment was a result of genuine error or misinterpretation of complex tax laws, can be a defence. Evidence seeking clarification or rectifying mistakes as soon as they were discovered needs to be maintained.
- Reliance on Professional Advice: reliance on the advice of competent tax advisors or accountants might provide a shield against liability. However, reliance on professional advice is not absolute and usually requires proof that the advice was professional, based on correct accurate information, and reasonable.
- No Direct Involvement: A director may argue they were not involved in the day-to-day management of the company or in the financial decisions that led to the unpaid taxes. This could apply in situations where there is a clear division of responsibilities among multiple directors.
- Procedural Errors by HMRC: If HMRC fail to follow proper procedures or meet certain legal requirements when issuing a Personal Liability Notice (PLN) or taking other actions, this may invalidate their claim.
- Unforeseeable Circumstances: Events beyond the director’s control, such as sudden market changes, natural disasters, or other external shocks that impact the company’s ability to pay, might be used as a defence, especially if these events can be clearly shown to correlate with the period of non-payment.
- Active Engagement with HMRC: Demonstrating that there was active engagement with HMRC regarding any payment issues, attempts to negotiate payment plans, or voluntary disclosures of potential underpayments can act in the director’s favour.
- Economic Reality: In some cases, directors can argue that, despite their best efforts, the company was unable to meet its tax obligations due to economic conditions affecting the company’s liquidity.
It is crucial for directors to maintain accurate records and documentation to support these defences. They should engage with legal and tax professionals as soon as they are aware of potential tax liabilities or HMRC actions, to ensure their case is as strong as possible.
In conclusion, while the UK legislation primarily places the burden of unpaid taxes on the company, directors can be made personally liable in certain circumstances. If a director finds themselves facing a PLN or potential liabilities for unpaid taxes, it’s essential to seek advice from an tax expert or professional adviser.
For further assistance or queries, please call 0114 272 4984 or email info@shipleystax.com.
Please note that Shipleys Tax do not give free advice by email or telephone. The content of this article is for general guidance only and should not be considered as tax or professional advice. For advice on tax matters, always consult with a qualified professional.
Want more tax tips and news? Sign up to our newsletter below.
TAXING BEAUTY – HMRC’s new approach to VAT for cosmetic procedures
DUE TO THE rapid growth of the private cosmetic medical sector in the UK, some noticeable shifts have begun to appear in HMRC’s approach to VAT in the cosmetic medical sector. HMRC have reportedly now established a dedicated team to examine the VAT implications of treatments such as Botox, skin fillers and facial peels.
In today’s Shipleys Tax brief, we consider whether HMRC’s position is now seemingly leaning towards categorizing certain treatments as standard-rated for VAT rather than exempt.
Historical Stance vs. Current Direction
While traditionally, treatments aimed at medical purposes have often been exempt from VAT, those perceived as purely cosmetic have leaned towards being standard rated (20%). This distinct separation is becoming more blurred. Procedures that serve dual purposes, such as Botox, now find themselves in a VAT grey area. There’s a growing inclination from HMRC to classify certain ambiguous cosmetic treatments as standard-rated unless they solidly fit within the medical exemption.
Recent court case
In one recent tribunal case involving a prominent skin clinic, these VAT issues were brought to the forefront. The clinic had applied for a VAT credit for a specific timeframe, a claim which HMRC challenged asserting that the services during that period were not exempt from VAT.
During the tribunal, a wealth of evidence was presented, including testimonies from the clinic’s lead practitioner, a highly qualified registered medical professional who had pivoted to ‘aesthetic medicine’ and operated the clinic, offering an array of cosmetic treatments.
While the tribunal acknowledged the lead practitioner’s expertise and dedication to professional ethics, it ruled that that cosmetic treatments provided by the clinic did not qualify for VAT medical exemption. It found that the treatments were for “aesthetic reasons” and not for clinical reasons.
The Impact
This evolving stance means that businesses offering cosmetic treatments need to be extra vigilant. The ruling underscores the importance of the nature and intent behind services in determining VAT status, emphasizing the need for meticulous record-keeping and understanding of HMRC’s evolving views on VAT exemptions in the cosmetic medical sector.
How Shipleys Tax can help
With the landscape shifting, our Shipleys VAT team can help ensure that your practice remains compliant, anticipating and adapting to any changes in HMRC’s perspective on VAT within the sector.
Adapting to change is vital in today’s dynamic environment and ensuring your practice stays ahead and compliant is crucial to avoid falling foul of the legislation.
If you would like assistance, or would like more information, please call 0114 272 4984 or email info@shipleystax.com.
Please note that Shipleys Tax do not give free advice by email or telephone.
Want more tax tips and news? Sign up to our newsletter below.
Testimonials
“We value the close working relationship we have with Shabeer and the specialist teams at Shipleys Tax...(read more)
Dr K, GP Surgery – Yorkshire
“One of the most frequent issues we had with our previous accountants was not being made aware, in advance... (read more)
FM Medical Practice – Manchester
“Accountants seem to promise the earth but don’t deliver do they? Well we found the opposite. Abdul made himself... (read more)
Mrs Khan – JL Healthcare
Contact us