Member Since: 7th Aug 2002
Kate is a technical writer, editor and lecturer on all aspects of employing people - primarily payroll and HR matters.
Owner Kate Upcraft Consultancy Ltd
24th Jan 2020
why would a pension provider ask you to declare what isn't true contractually? as everyone has said there are no employee contributions, it's a non contributory pension scheme. Very odd
24th Jan 2020
I think you're asking as a practice that is running the payroll for the PSC (the contractor) rather than providing payroll services for clients who use contractors? If it is the former, when the director wishes to extract salary from their PSC (Potentially once a year if you're running an annual PAYE scheme) the amount withdrawn is now reported non-taxable non n'iable and the amount is reported in data code 58A within the full payment submission.. However, given that the director's NI record is now protected by the deemed payment that's been made by the client/agency you may choose no longer to withdraw monies on the basis of a salary and withdraw them all as a dividend, which will equally be tax-free up to the net amount that is already had a with holding by the end client. or their agency if they are the fee payer. for seats of how to prepare there SA return see the new ESM page at https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/employment-status-manual/esm9085
21st Nov 2019
there is just a little bit missing form the original chain of events. There PSC has to report any salary paid to the director as non-taxable/non-ni'able through RTI up to the limit of the income that has already been taxed by the fee payer
9th Nov 2018
maybe there will be, discussions with BEIS have indicated this is not just for hourly paid staff but for salaried staff too who have any lump sums driven by hours worked, for example a call out payment that could be £50 or £75 depending on the hours I did attending the site would now need hours shown. The guidance as Neil says will be vital so we can see what BEIS see as in scope as there could be significant process flow changes needed from clients to payroll agents
28th Jun 2018
Hello, I’m a member of the statutory payments forum with HMRC, BEIS and DWP. We have discussed this as it is much more common now a/typical workers are in pension schemes generally - such as zero hours workers with no normal pay. The law is silent on the appropriate calculation, so the view is as long as you’re consistent you can’t be wrong so suggestions such as your 12 weeks prior to the maternity start date or the pay during the average weekly earnings used for the SMP calculations would in my opinion be entirely appropriate
16th Nov 2017
For the simple reason already outlined here a)they have to accept there are issues in their system and b) ask for money to fix them. I’m hoping a and b might happen before I retire but as I’m only due to work for five more years I’m not holding my breath!
15th Nov 2017
Some of you will know I write about this on accounting web regularly reflecting what I hear every day from agents and employers when lecturing. I only run 4 Payrolls these days to help local charities and two have disputed charges. HMRC have recently stated in an answer to a PMQ that they receive 590m records p.a. Via RTI. We must remember that Each disputed charge is caused by taxpayer (that’s employee and pensioner) records being corrupted which now can have very significant consequences thanks to the deployment of dynamic coding in July by HMRC and the accelerated rollout of Universal Credit. With 590m records, One system relying on invalidated corrupted data is bad, two together spells meltdown for some people’s finances and the employers and agents that support them
9th Oct 2017
The Business Tax account has been upgraded - I use the term loosely - I wrote about the planned changes in my article https://www.accountingweb.co.uk/tax/hmrc-policy/business-tax-accounts-ge.... However, when I logged in to my scheme about 10 days ago I was not impressed with the layout or the fact the payment page had been removed. So, I contacted HMRC and spent last monday pm with the BTA developers and they were very receptive to all my feedback so I'm hopeful we will get all the functionality back and more (eventually!)
14th Sep 2017
Interesting that a 'technical expert' said to Rhino83 'don't rely on the figure in your business tax account'. As I wrote in my recent article https://www.accountingweb.co.uk/tax/hmrc-policy/business-tax-accounts-ge...
the BTA has had an upgrade that finished roll out this week (although the breakdown page and the DMB payments received page has now mysteriously disappeared but should remerge I'm told). The data is now called from a different part of HMRC so from now on is supposed to match RTI data exactly, so any discrepancies are real now and need to be followed up as a disputed charge. Only as part of this roll out have they admitted that for the last four years there were batch processing errors that led to the liabilities displayed not matching what they could see. As to the DMB figures I don't expect any improvements in payments recorded and allocated as ETMP still seems unpredictable and unstable!
I too like lionoffludesch entered employee numbers for People's pensions for two employees in July and one duplicated and one didn't! I'm still pushing HMRC to get round the table and discuss how they have business rules that infer second jobs from simple changes to personal data. I'll probably retire before we start to see RTI working as HMRC's 'customers' need it to but at least I will have tried!!
12th Dec 2016
HMRC have recently confirmed in answer to a parliamentary question that there were 3.49m P800s for 14/15. For 2013/14 when RTI was introduced it went up from 3.6m to 3.95m. Of course PAYE is not an exact science so there will always be under and overpayments but clearly RTI has not improved matters. Underpayments are half the level of overpayments at 1.48m for 13/14 and 1.56 for 14/15. They have also said in 15/16 that nearly 41,000 PAYE schemes disputed their liabilities and each scheme of course can cover thousands of employers. So you can see why many of us are so concerned about the state of taxpayer data and the damage that does to employees and agents as well as the taxpayer