You might also be interested in
Replies (22)
Please login or register to join the discussion.
The idea that an inspector would just accept the company's assertion that it had complied is ludicrous. They should have continued their investigations despite the assertion. I now assume TPR either does not have enough teeth or does not take its duties seriously enough.
Yes. Mind, TPR would then only have been able to take umbrage with the failure to comply.
Now it can raise penalties for that AND for the lies.
Accountants need to promote, not demote auto-enrolment. Workplace pensions aren't a tax to be avoided but a workplace benefit to be celebrated.”
ALL PRAISE TO THE HOLY ONE
Hardly a cause for celebration it's just an extra cost imposed by government.
Disappointing attitude but typical of this sad country. Treat the workers like dirt. Only provide for them when forced. When oh when will we learn, understand and apply good working relationships? As a nation we are a disgrace.
Perhaps if idiotic politicians hadnt swamped us with low waged immigration over the last few decades, and had properly controlled the financial system, we might have been able to keep the state pension at 65/60.
The incremental costs (NHS/benefits/schools/etc)of looking after millions of minimum wage Immigrants is much greater than the incremental national economic benefit of that labour. Its about wealth distribution I.e cheaper labour for business owners, with costs externalised to the masses.
I would not worry about the immigrants earning low wages but the overlords in the pocket of Russians, accumulating the wealth produced by the above, gaining even more by stirring up the ants nest. Tax-paying immigrant.
"I'll simply lie to them - they won't check"
Is that extreme arrogance, or extreme stupidity?
Baffling...
Yes, So TPR take the accountants word of mouth and the investigation is delayed for 1 year?
Surely a quick check of payroll records or a chat to the staff would show he was lying. Wage, age and no opt out would show he lied.
Maybe a lot of investigating and money would have been saved.
Anyway back to celebrating A/E.
On another note, the company's website shows the company registration number as 07294658 but Companies House shows dormant accounts being filed every year since incorporation for that company. If there is a separate company trading the business then the website would be associated with that company?
Sadly there are charlatans and mountebanks in every profession - it makes the world a richer (sic) place.
It is strange that they are not going after the employer whose responsibility it is. They are prosecuting a third party acting on behalf of the employer.
Have I missed something ? Does that mean that some part-time accountant I employ to do my bookkeeping can take the blame if my accounts to HMRC are full of errors.
One law for TPR and one law for HMRC.
I very much doubt that the employees will be happy having to fork out all the backdated contributions.
Just a bunch of young people working in a café temporarily before deciding on career moves. Every pound counts for them. Many are from the EU and , in most likelihood, do not know they can opt out.
I am curious to know , should a national survey be taken out, how many people are aware of the opt out clause. Even though they get a pack , they probably don't realise.
I have found that every time I informed somebody that they can opt they went for the opting out. They don't really care about the employer's additional contribution. They just don't want to be coerced into a pension scheme.
But it's not that it's simply buried in the welcome pack. It's also included in the single page letter that the employer is mandated to give to the employee when they are enrolled.
Both the pack and the single page letter arrive after months of advertising campaign which does not mention :-
1)Opting out
2)Your pension scheme may under-perform or you may lose everything.
The public had already been "briefed" by the TV and poster advert. In their mind it was a compulsory thing with no risk . No need to read the letter or pack. Govt. always has best intention ....
With my clients who have failed to meet their obligations despite numerous reminders from us, they have had to backdate the employer contributions but the employees have the choice as to whether to backdate or not.
Personally I think there will be a much higher rate of opt-out come April when employees have to contribute 5%. I think that is far too much, too quickly for a lot of employees to stomach.
Good to know the employees have a choice not to backdate.
I agree. There will definitely be a higher rate of opt-out when the mandatory contribution rate goes up.
There are alternatives to providing for retirement. Perhaps the government thinks we are too stupid to think for ourselves.
And when will successive governments since the 1950s be prosecuted for not paying in the full contributions to the state old age pension funds?