It is difficult to discern any guiding principles on the application of the IR35 rules from these two latest cases, writes Liz Wilson (Squire Patton Boggs).
Cases on the IR35 rules appear to be like London buses: you wait a while for one and then several come at once.
In MDCM Ltd v HMRC [2018] UKFTT 147 MDCM Ltd was wholly owned by Mr Daniels. He and his wife were its sole directors and employees. It used him to supervise construction projects during unsocial hours – at nights weekends and over holiday periods. The First-tier Tribunal (FTT) was asked to look at two projects for end-user STL for which MDCM had been engaged to provide Mr Daniels’ services. As with Christa Ackroyd’s company in Christa Ackroyd Media v HMRC [2018] UKFTT 69 HMRC argued that MDCM should account for income tax and NICs on all amounts received...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
It is difficult to discern any guiding principles on the application of the IR35 rules from these two latest cases, writes Liz Wilson (Squire Patton Boggs).
Cases on the IR35 rules appear to be like London buses: you wait a while for one and then several come at once.
In MDCM Ltd v HMRC [2018] UKFTT 147 MDCM Ltd was wholly owned by Mr Daniels. He and his wife were its sole directors and employees. It used him to supervise construction projects during unsocial hours – at nights weekends and over holiday periods. The First-tier Tribunal (FTT) was asked to look at two projects for end-user STL for which MDCM had been engaged to provide Mr Daniels’ services. As with Christa Ackroyd’s company in Christa Ackroyd Media v HMRC [2018] UKFTT 69 HMRC argued that MDCM should account for income tax and NICs on all amounts received...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
