We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
Self employed construction
Comments
-
He'd struggle to convince an accountant to claim for the car as a business asset unless he only uses it for business.
Cars are rarely used only for business. Where there is some duality then apportionment is appropriate. This will be the case for an extremely high proportion of self employed people, is perfectly normal and agreed by HMRC.
The business asset is written down according to the tax rules and the allowances is then reduced by the private proportion. The fully written down value is the value used to calculate next years allowance which will be similarly reduced.
This method is best used when the value of the car is high or the mileage is low.When the car is not worth a lot or the mileage is high then it is better to claim 45p for the first 10,000 miles and 25p per mile thereafter. The maths is up to you.The only thing that is constant is change.0 -
Cheers, car value is relatively low and milage is quite high so will stick with milage. Many thanks0
-
He is self employed as far as the employer is concerned, no holidays or sick pay and has to submit a self assesment, he is in the building enviroment so yes CIS,
. So travelling to and from a job is not tax deductable, umm so when is it tax deductable, he isnt travelling to the office he is given a destination to go and has to use his own transport to get there so this must surley be a cost.he doesnt set rates or dictate when or how the job gets done
The company the OP's son works for is trying to have their cake and eat it. They want him to work for them ,not pay him holiday/paternity/sick pay etc but want him to work the hours they dictate. One of the rules that HMRC use to set to see if someone was self employed was that the person set the the hours they worked,set the rate they worked for and that they would send in writted estimates/quotes for the work and that the person was taking a financial risk that being self employed has.
He should be classes as employed as he clearly isn't self employed.About 15 years ago HMRC clamped down on companies who were classing employees as self-employed and companies were rushing to take on self employed construction workers on the cards and a year or so later they all went self employed again whilst still working for the same company.
Its the same old rouse to employ people on the cheap and its shameful behaviour by the company.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.3K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.3K Spending & Discounts
- 247.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 603.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.3K Life & Family
- 261.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards