Member Since: 27th May 2015
10th Jun 2020
I corrected as I went, and I challenge HMRC to successfully challenge my approach given the sanctions available to them for doing it wrong, and their lack of movement on guidance for correcting.
I'd happily see them at tribunal re this.
30th May 2020
And so many staff in the hospitality industry will lose their jobs, and many of those business will go to the wall, as long as their closure remains enforced. With no monies coming in, how are they going to meet the outgoings.
Rather a short sited policy, IMO.
4th May 2020
I haven't read the case notes, but based on the above there are a couple of things that strike me as wrong, and which could be over-turned on appeal:
On the right of substitution, this was disregarded because "it would be difficult". I'm not so sure that ease or lack of is valid argument against something being possible.
And on control, "heavy regulation" would also appear to be a red herring. Gas fitters are also regulated, as are financial advisors, but no-one seems to be arguing that the regulation makes them employees.
I hope that he takes this to appeal.
27th Apr 2020
Quote:We will answer the phone within thirty seconds...
Which actually means, "our robot will answer the phone within 30 seconds. You will then be kept on hold for an indeterminate period of time".
23rd Apr 2020
Quote:But its promotional mailing on Friday advising employers that “to receive payment by 30 April, you will need to complete an application by 22 April” may have stimulated a surge of visitors when the system was barely up and running on the first day.
I think it was a very ill-advised mailing to have made, creating a sense of urgency and panic that, in reality, was around something of a non-issue.
20th Apr 2020
Whilst I have some sympathy for the individuals employed by HMRC, I have little sympathy for HMRC the organisation.
For years it hass forced more and more bureaucratic garbage on taxpayers and agents, with the threat of ever increasing penalties for failing, whilst not accepting any responsibility for delays and errors itself.
Now, HMRC wants our help. No. My clients will receive my help, but I have enough to do without doing HMRC's job for them.
Perhaps when this is all over they will realise that a relationship of mutual respect is far more efficient than them alienating those they rely on when times get tough.
16th Apr 2020
Quote:but we haven’t seen definitive confirmation that HMRC will accept that the further condition of lack of choice over working arrangements has been met.
Surely Government guidance itself ("Stay at Home") is sufficient to remove any choice over working arrangements. In fact the only choice is work from home or don't work at all.
15th Apr 2020
And then he buggered off to Chequers, his holiday home, contrary to his own Governments instructions. His right hand man, Dominic Cummings, having only just recovered from Covid-19 also chose to completely ignore Government advice, and has returned to work at No.10.
Do not try to sell me on a "benevolent government" when those making the rules are so happy to flout them.
14th Apr 2020
31st Mar 2020
valakot wrote:2) If employer choose to pay furloughed employee 80% (grant) and not to up 20% while he still must run through payroll 100% of wage (as normal) how do you later account for 20% which will be underpaid?
Where are you getting 100% still goes through payroll even if only 80% is being paid? That makes no sense, and I haven't seen anything to that effect.