Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

Indeed Dil but the enforcement returns under this government are very small.

Lends support to the deterrent factor.

And I agree you are or you aint under IR35.

Hope cynic is now going to see what balderdash he was posting yesterday. To be fair though I couldnt tell him about chemicals and the oil business.

Each to their own etc etc.

I had unclassified in my o level chemistry exam so wouldn't dream of explaining how the atom bomb works to cynic who's post I find in the main very informative.

Therefore he should respect the fact that I got o levels in accounts and economics and if I remember right you got a couple of CSE grade 4's in said subjects :-)

Nite mate.

LOL......same old Dil. nite bud.

electionista ‏@electionista 6h
UK - YouGov/Sun poll:

CON 32%
LAB 39%
LDEM 10%
UKIP 12%

i now sort of know what IR35 is, and it clearly has no bearing at all on the "snippet" i reported - i.e. apparently, so it was reported, the 1% of highest salary earners contribute 30% of the income tax haul

if taking divi instead of salary is a LEGITIMATE means of reducing one's income tax liability, then so be it ..... nevertheless, divi is scarcely tax free, though of course NI is not payable on it either by the company or the individual
if the rules change and the above is no longer so, then to try to do so, would fall under evasion

You can easily avoid IR35 if you are smart. The fact is that it never raised the tax revenues that were estimated and not even 1% of it. It shows that there was no problem to start with.

Labour 'sent out search parties for immigrants', Lord Mandelson admits

Labour sent out “search parties” for immigrants in a policy which has created a “problem” for British people unable to find work, Lord Mandelson has admitted.

The former Cabinet minister confirmed for the first time that New Labour not only welcomed but actively encouraged that mass influx of migrants.

He conceded that this now poses a major difficulty for the party’s traditional supporters, according to the Daily Mail.

Earlier this year Ed Miliband admitted that the last Labour government was not “sufficiently alive to people's concerns” over immigration and his party got “the numbers wrong”.

But the party leader stopped short of admitting that immigration was too high.

Between 1997 and 2010, more than 2.2 million immigrants came to the country - more than twice the population of Birmingham – with the annual net figure quadrupling during their time in office.

Lord Mandelson admitted: “In 2004 when as a Labour government, we were not only welcoming people to come into this country to work, we were sending out search parties for people and encouraging them, in some cases, to take up work in this country.”

In the past senior figures have denied that they engineered immigration, and three years ago refuted suggestions from adviser Andrew Neather that they encouraged the process to make the UK “truly multicultural” as a snub to the right.

At a rally for the Blairite think-tank Progress this weekend, Lord Mandelson said that when they began the policy employment was high, but “the problem has grown” as the economy has stagnated.

They have to realise that watching people of non-British origin enter the labour market is hard for those who are finding it difficult to find and keep work.

“For these people immigration tends to loom large in their lives and in their worlds, now that is an inescapable fact, and we have to understand it, address it, engage with people in discussion about it,” he said.

Tory chairman Grant Shapps said that the admission that Labour had let immigration “spiral out of control” was “yet another damning indictment on their record on immigration.”

How can you place a value on the deterrent factor???? so Hays comment above is complete boll-x............................yet again.

What deterrent factor and what was the point as it hasn't raised extra revenue.,There was no need for the deterrent.

ANOTHER STUPID LABOUR POLICY

Miliband has a new policy thought up over his boiled egg.

He thinks the banks are too big and wants no bank to have over 25% of market. Now he wants the current banks to sell off branches to make two new banks for more competition.

Sounds nice eh.

Once the banks find there is a finite limit on their size and market share they will not be able to expand. The answer will be to cherry pick the best customers and dump the less profitable ones. That is the beginning of a trend that leads to poor people not being able to get bank accounts. It happened years ago. The TSB was the bank for poor people. It was such a stigma that the software that credit scores people took account of it. If you have a bank account then you get say 100 points. If you have a TSB account then you get minus 25. That means it was worse to have a TSB account than no bank account.

ANOTHER STUPID LABOUR POLICY

Well if you cant see the deterrent factor then Im afraid your going do laly. Certainly hasnt raised extra taxes under the Tories. And thats because its way under manned.

Dil pointed out what Im getting at last night.

Anyway no good debating with a block of concrete.

come on guys .... you're all going off at a tangent

i thought the point raised was very interesting and surprising
fossy gets ignored (by me) even if he bothers to post, but nothing written so far has managed to dent the initial premise (assertion)

with regard to the rights to be paid divi rather than salary, it's quite a fine line
my own little company, of which i own 100%, trades in its own right and name but i also work as a consultant through that company on behalf of another
the consultancy fee gets paid into the company and i may or may not choose to draw divi at some point
all this is very transparent and open
i fail to see that i am sailing remotely close to the wind - and HMRC does not disagree

gf
It didn't raise extra money under Labour after you add the cost of running it plus investigations.

ANOTHER STUPID LABOUR POLICY

cynic
What you are doing is quite legal. When I had a company, one year my partner and me took our whole year's salary as a dividend., which was quite a saving. Sole traders can still do the same. IR35 is really aimed at contractors (specifically IT) who work through contract agencies. As I said you can avoid all the IR35 rules fairly easily.

Vince Cable was on the news just now rubbishing Miliband's bank plans.

Hollander's speech the other day was sonehat of a U turn on his socialist policies that are not working.

He said that he would reduce tax on businesses, that the cost of labour had yo be reduced. He also said that the standards of living had to fall.

These are all market led supply side policies in the style of the Conservative party. It is beginning to look like he has realised that his socialist policies have failed.

Haze.

In spite of all your blustering:

UK - YouGov/Sun poll:

CON 32%
LAB 39%
LDEM 10%
UKIP 12%

=======

Miliband Promises 'Reckoning' With Big Banks
however, it has been correctly pointed out that HSBC could easily re-locate back to HK and Barclays to NY
the same interviewee, reckoned it was all just a load of window-dressing - and no, it was neither a tory mp nor a banker!

===========

increasing the minimum wage
somewhat belatedly, GO is joining the bandwagon for increasing the minimum wage, allegedly by ~10%
how detrimental would that be for small businesses, especially those in the high street who may (probably are) already struggling to stay afloat?
what happens to those on zero-hour contracts?
will more companies insist that their "employees" become self-employed to avoid (evade?) this issue?