Tax Investigations
ags
is a firm of accountants based in Wolverhampton. The firm
specialises in tax investigation assistance and has recently
achieved an exceptional result for a client in a case
rare with the Inland Revenue.
Background
to the case:
The
point of issue is a favourite with the Revenue; that of
a workers “status”. In other words was this
particular worker self-employed or really an employee
of the client? Eighteen months prior to this investigation
the furnace building company owner and his wife, a co-director,
had been selected for what purported to be a routine PAYE
compliance review, where all of the company’s records
were subjected to checks by the tax team. No problems
were found with the records, however the business owners
found themselves subjected to a lengthy, detailed and
at times, hostile cross-examination concerning one of
their workers.
Notes
of this meeting presented to the client afterwards did
not appear to represent a true and fair appraisal of the
facts. In essence, the Revenue did not accept that this
worker was a self employed individual. They alleged that
in reality he was an employee of the company and should
be treated that way for tax purposes. The resulting tax
effect of this decision meant that the business owners
now had a tax bill for over £20,000 in PAYE and
NI payments for previous years.
Preparing
the case:
The case was assessed and agreed with the business owners
that this particular worker in his view was self-employed.
The reasons were this; the worker was far more skilled
than other employees of the company and as such was hired
by business owners for specialist work. The worker tendered
for each separate job and negotiated accordingly with
the business owners. He raised his own invoices, kept
his own hours, suffered any loss on the work himself,
had his own accounts prepared by his own Chartered Accountant
and never received any employee benefits such as sick
pay or holiday pay. If there was no work for him then
he did not get paid.
Despite
all this the Inland Revenue still regarded him as an employee
and pushed aside every attempt to provide more evidence
and explanations.
Winning
the case:
Despite holding talks with the Revenue they would not
change their view. They had unofficially agreed to settle
for a lesser amount but threatened that if they were forced
to list the case for hearing before an independent tribunal,
the General Commissioners, they would seek the whole £20,000.
Results:
The short time taken to make judgement was demonstrative
of the fact that the Commissioners felt that the Revenue
had no case against the business owners. Soon afterwards
and with little resistance, the Revenue agreed to pay
all fees including the costs of the hearing and a payment
to the business owners in consideration of the stress
suffered as a result of the investigation.
It
is extremely rare to win this type of contentious case
before the Commissioners and even rarer to be awarded
costs and compensation. A truly marvellous achievement.