IR35 means accountants no longer viable?
mark...@callnetuk.com
A lot of people seem to be suggesting that accountants will no longer
be needed. Do any of you know something I dont?
Ian Stephenson
No. It's mostly speculation. Some may have a view of what they'll do
in their particular circumstances, but if you a) currently run a Ltd
Company and require the services of an accountant and b) intend to
continue running a Ltd Company, then I don't see why you'll do without.
Some may believe that they'll stop operating a Ltd Company, simply go
self-employed, and arrange their own S-E finances. As such, they may
feel an accountant would no longer be required.
--
Ian
Laurie Brown
If you're only allowed 5% of gross as non-schedule E expenses, don't
need to have an audit merely file accounts, and use a tool such as
QuickBooks, WTF would you want to shell out for an accountant? Where's
the added value? He can't exactly save you any tax!
Cheers, Laurie.
Paul Garbett
news:3874D173...@brownowl.com...
Problem is Quick books will not prepare a set of accounts to Companies Act
format - IMHO QB will not prepare anything resembling a sensible set of
accounts at all. Likewise QB will not prepare a CT600 return and
computations, do a P11D or do an SA100.
Quick Books is a tool, not the end product. Just because I own a spanner
doesn't mean I can service my car if I do not know the principles behind the
internal combustion engine.
You're right in one way - added value will be difficult for accountants to
show post IR 35, but look at it from the point of view of time and hassle
saved - i.e. value not lost else where.
There may be some scope for added value on just what does and doesn't fall
within the Schedule E rules (given that there will be unlimited deductions
for these expenses). The "necessarily" element of "wholly, exclusively and
necessarily" (Schedule E rules) distinguished from the "wholly and
exclusively" Schedule D rules is **not** straight forward and is open to
challenge both by taxpayer and IR.
May we live in interesting times...
Regards
--
Paul Garbett
Garbetts Chartered Certified Accountants
Off...@garbetts.demon.co.uk
www.garbetts.demon.co.uk
Joe Burke
them will be significantly less, but as you rightly say filing annual
returns P11d's etc who could be bothered, I am a technical consultant, my
time is best spent generating revenue at a higher rate that the outgoing
cost of an accountant. e.g. do I take a week off work to paint my house, I
think not, I get a painter and decorator who can do it in half the time for
a reasonable fee and spend the time generating ££.
Paul Garbett <off...@garbetts.nospamplease.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:947182583.26822.0...@news.demon.co.uk...
Jon Griffey
<SF...@Dial.Pipex.Com> writes
>I think that accountants fees should be reduced as the amount of work for
>them will be significantly less, but as you rightly say filing annual
>returns P11d's etc who could be bothered, I am a technical consultant, my
>time is best spent generating revenue at a higher rate that the outgoing
>cost of an accountant. e.g. do I take a week off work to paint my house, I
>think not, I get a painter and decorator who can do it in half the time for
>a reasonable fee and spend the time generating ＃.
>
If anything the IR35 rules may mean more work (for those company's that
still exist of course), for example:-
1. Trying to shoehorn expenses into the wholly, exclusively and
necessarily rule.
2. Advising on whether contracts fall into or out of IR35, and how to
make them fall the right side. We will see many more status disputes.
3. What to do with non-IR35 sources of income including deposit
interest.
4. How to apportion expenses between IR35 and non-IR35 sources.
5. Calculating the deemed salary.
6. Protracted correspondence with HMIT about the above.
IR35 will introduce a stack of complications which will make it even
more difficult for the layman to deal with his own affairs.
I can see many problems arising as IR35 conflicts with the basic
principles of company law.
--
Jon Griffey FCCA ATII
Hackett Griffey
Chartered Certified Accountants & Registered Auditors
2 Mill Road
Haverhill
Suffolk
CB9 8BD
Tel (01440) 762024 Days
Tel (01440) 708376 Eves
Rod Ellingham
principles of the ICE - just how to carry out straightforward
component changes to a more or less passable standard, press buttons
on an exhaust gas analyzer and put greasy marks on your upholstery...
Their elders 7 so-called betters have queried whether they need to
know anything further.
Rod
Neil Wilson
them or offer them a permanent position with a third party placement
company. Owning your own company under the IR35 rules makes no sense at all,
when you can not own it and have much more flexibility.
Moreover I would suggest that accountants are the last people who you would
want advising you on contracts. In general accountants have little knowledge
of how the knowledge based industry actually works.
What the Revenue thinks are the rules is ultimately irrelevant. The case law
has little or no relevance to an industry that has not been 'self-employed'
in the real sense for over twenty-five years. Accountants will have to get
back to basics and justify cases based on the real business needs of IT and
engineering.
No accountant worth hiring is going to be bothering with the IR35 tax rules.
They will get their clients through one or other of the IR35 exemptions.
--
Neil Wilson (neil@aldur on the demon.co.uk network)
Aldur Systems Ltd, UK
Jon Griffey <j...@griffey.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:a860QAAF...@griffey.demon.co.uk...
Ian Stephenson
>If you're only allowed 5% of gross as non-schedule E expenses, don't
>need to have an audit merely file accounts, and use a tool such as
>QuickBooks, WTF would you want to shell out for an accountant? Where's
>the added value? He can't exactly save you any tax!
Why do you need an accountant in the first place? If it's only for tax
advice, then I'm sure you may be correct. But if it's also for PAYE,
annual returns, VAT returns, etc. then if you continue to operate a VAT-
registered Ltd Company post-IR35 these issues will not go away.
Also, who will advise on what is/isn't allowable? YOU may know all
these answers, but I'm sure most IT contractors are not also accountants
and so most will need to continue to rely on advice from the latter.
--
Ian
Colin Wray
>On Thu, 6 Jan 2000, mark...@callnetuk.com wrote:
>
>>I was intending to keep my accountant for filing company stuff etc.
>>A lot of people seem to be suggesting that accountants will no longer
>>be needed. Do any of you know something I dont?
>
>No. It's mostly speculation. Some may have a view of what they'll do
>in their particular circumstances, but if you a) currently run a Ltd
>Company and require the services of an accountant and b) intend to
>continue running a Ltd Company, then I don't see why you'll do without.
Does your accountant supply you with a copy of every single piece of
paper that he sends to Companies House and the Revenue ? (If not,
demand them now). Doing it yourself after that is easy - just a matter
of changing the actual figures each year.
Colin
Peter Saxton
<ne...@aldur.systems.ltd> wrote:
>Moreover I would suggest that accountants are the last people who you would
>want advising you on contracts. In general accountants have little knowledge
>of how the knowledge based industry actually works.
>
I don't think anyone was suggesting that accountants should draft
contracts on their own. I would think a client would be acting
irresponsibly if they prepared contracts without tax advice in these
circumstances. Luckily, we accountants don't come across irresponsible
clients! :-)
--
Peter Saxton from London
pe...@petersaxton.co.uk
Peter Saxton
wrote:
You're lucky to be living in a world which doesn't have any changes to
legislation or tax working practices
Chris Jones
> more difficult for the layman to deal with his own affairs.
>
> I can see many problems arising as IR35 conflicts with the basic
> principles of company law.
>
Not to mention similar conflicts with contract law (specifically the
principle of "Privity of Contract" - new legislation is currently proposed
on this area).
> --
> Jon Griffey FCCA ATII
> Hackett Griffey
> Chartered Certified Accountants & Registered Auditors
> 2 Mill Road
> Haverhill
> Suffolk
> CB9 8BD
>
> Tel (01440) 762024 Days
> Tel (01440) 708376 Eves
>
> http://www.griffey.demon.co.uk
--
Chris Jones,
reply to: ch...@telespan.demon.co.uk
web: http://www.telespan.demon.co.uk
Neil Wilson
ostriches myself over the years.
However some accountants are ducking the issue, because they don't
understand the industry and are not prepared to question the Revenue's shaky
definition of employment.
--
Neil Wilson (neil@aldur on the demon.co.uk network)
Aldur Systems Ltd, UK
Peter Saxton <pe...@petersaxton.co.uk> wrote in message
news:b9rc7s4he9q6fk1bp...@4ax.com...
Jon Griffey
Wilson <ne...@aldur.systems.ltd> writes
>Actually Jon, if you're advising your client correctly,
Ouch!
>What the Revenue thinks are the rules is ultimately irrelevant. The case law
>has little or no relevance to an industry that has not been 'self-employed'
>in the real sense for over twenty-five years. Accountants will have to get
>back to basics and justify cases based on the real business needs of IT and
>engineering.
>
But not everybody falls into the black and white, even in IT. There are
a great many one-man companies who fall into a murky grey area.
As the employment v self-employment question is not defined in statute,
but by masses of often contradictory cases, we can expect a lot of
status disputes resulting from IR35.
Neil Wilson
The only people who are going to win out of this are the lawyers. (The good
accountants like yourself are going to find themselves with a lot of work as
well. The bad and the timid will duck the issue).
If, as I suspect, we shred IR35 so much that it becomes a useless piece of
legislation, we will be back to square one with nothing gained other than a
lot of large bills and much clearer self-employment rules!
And then I think the government will have another go.
--
Neil Wilson (neil@aldur on the demon.co.uk network)
Aldur Systems Ltd, UK
Jon Griffey <j...@griffey.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:nSlbrDA0...@griffey.demon.co.uk...