| Taxi Driver Online http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/ |
|
| Operator loses appeal against HMRC's self-employed drivers http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=30691 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | skippy41 [ Fri Feb 10, 2017 12:26 am ] |
| Post subject: | Operator loses appeal against HMRC's self-employed drivers |
http://www.commercialmotor.com/news/com ... 7C_News_CM Looking like everyone will need to be employed |
|
| Author: | heathcote [ Fri Feb 10, 2017 1:13 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Operator loses appeal against HMRC's self-employed drive |
skippy41 wrote: http://www.commercialmotor.com/news/compliance/operator-loses-appeal-against-hmrcs-self-employed-driver-ruling?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=dlvrit&utm_campaign=FACEBOOK_%7C_News_CM Looking like everyone will need to be employed Not long before we see private hire operators in the frame(not just talking about uber) and the V.A.T. man will want his cut on every fare that is done. |
|
| Author: | Sussex [ Fri Feb 10, 2017 10:58 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Operator loses appeal against HMRC's self-employed drive |
I think the VAT issue and the employment issue are separate. If a company takes a cut of a fare a driver has done, then that cut and possibly the whole fare is VAT able. But if the company just takes a weekly rental then only that is VAT able, not the fares that the driver has taken. I think. |
|
| Author: | Sussex [ Fri Feb 10, 2017 12:01 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Operator loses appeal against HMRC's self-employed drive |
Very interesting to see today the Court of Appeal is on the side of worker status for self employed. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38931211 |
|
| Author: | edders23 [ Fri Feb 10, 2017 12:04 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Operator loses appeal against HMRC's self-employed drive |
split purse = VAT on all fares weekly settle/rental that money is liable to VAT not the drivers takings unless above VAT threshold BUT if companies forced to make drivers employed it would be the total of all fares VAT liable |
|
| Author: | trotskys twin [ Fri Feb 10, 2017 12:09 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Operator loses appeal against HMRC's self-employed drive |
Sussex wrote: Very interesting to see today the Court of Appeal is on the side of worker status for self employed. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38931211 And for how many years have i bveen telling you loons exactly that  so now if your at Hermes Addy Lee or others like them NOWS your chance 
|
|
| Author: | jimbo [ Fri Feb 10, 2017 5:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Operator loses appeal against HMRC's self-employed drive |
skippy41 wrote: http://www.commercialmotor.com/news/compliance/operator-loses-appeal-against-hmrcs-self-employed-driver-ruling?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=dlvrit&utm_campaign=FACEBOOK_%7C_News_CM Looking like everyone will need to be employed Not everyone Skippy, not everyone. As Leo Sayer sang... "I'm a one man band" |
|
| Author: | grandad [ Fri Feb 10, 2017 7:45 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Operator loses appeal against HMRC's self-employed drive |
jimbo wrote: skippy41 wrote: http://www.commercialmotor.com/news/compliance/operator-loses-appeal-against-hmrcs-self-employed-driver-ruling?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=dlvrit&utm_campaign=FACEBOOK_%7C_News_CM Looking like everyone will need to be employed Not everyone Skippy, not everyone. As Leo Sayer sang... "I'm a one man band" Ah but maybe you will have to become a limited company and then employ yourself. 
|
|
| Author: | jimbo [ Fri Feb 10, 2017 8:25 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Operator loses appeal against HMRC's self-employed drive |
grandad wrote: jimbo wrote: skippy41 wrote: http://www.commercialmotor.com/news/compliance/operator-loses-appeal-against-hmrcs-self-employed-driver-ruling?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=dlvrit&utm_campaign=FACEBOOK_%7C_News_CM Looking like everyone will need to be employed Not everyone Skippy, not everyone. As Leo Sayer sang... "I'm a one man band" Ah but maybe you will have to become a limited company and then employ yourself. I'd sack me on the first day.... |
|
| Author: | Sussex [ Fri Feb 10, 2017 9:05 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Operator loses appeal against HMRC's self-employed drive |
Sussex wrote: Very interesting to see today the Court of Appeal is on the side of worker status for self employed. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38931211 Having read some of the judgement Pimlico v Smith 2017 I'm amzed at just how bad a company, a well established company, can treat those that make money for it. One of the conditions of the contract is that if the customer doesn't pay the firm' invoice, for the work undertaken by the plumber, within six months, then the plumber doesn't get a bean for all the work he has done. Even if the customer subsequently pays in month seven.  Not often I'm speechless. 
|
|
| Author: | roythebus [ Sat Feb 11, 2017 12:47 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Operator loses appeal against HMRC's self-employed drive |
Deja Vu? I remember posting a link to this case a week or so ago on the court case database section. 
|
|
| Author: | edders23 [ Sat Feb 11, 2017 7:13 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Operator loses appeal against HMRC's self-employed drive |
roythebus wrote: Deja Vu? I remember posting a link to this case a week or so ago on the court case database section. do you think skippy would have noticed that ? plus this is an article in a rag about said case |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|