Second job... 40% tax?!

dearlouise

I'm a teacher earning approx 24k. I have debt I'm trying to reduce so spent the 6 weeks working and will probably work in other holidays if possible.

What I earnt from the summer job wasn't a lot, about £2.5k & I paid basic rate tax.

Got a letter from hmrc saying I'll now be charged 40% on any earning from the summer job employer... I don't understand why. As I haven't gone above the threshold?

I wanted to know if this was right as they've asked me to work during half term and it's just not worth it if I'm going to pay 40% tax. 😟:(

booksurr

why is 60% in hand not "worth" having for a week's work? Give it to me instead !

you are of course correct that you are no where near the 40% bracket. What letter did you get, was it a tax code letter altering your tax code on your 2nd job to D0?
http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/incometax/check-multiple-codes.htm

you then have to contest it with HMRC as they are currently notorious for failing to process tax codes correctly and you should be on BR code not D0

WestonDave

The PAYE system doesn't cope well with multiple jobs - if you are already earning over the tax threshold in one job they will tend to tax you heavily in the second because its easier to refund you at the end of the tax year for overpaid tax than to chase you for unpaid tax. So whilst you may be deducted 40% now, when both P60's are submitted at the year end you will get the excess back.

CLAPTON

pick up the phone and speak to HMRC explaining how much you earn in your main job and what you expect to earn in the second: they should put you on BR for the second job.

Spidernick

As explained above, it will all come out in the wash. What is of more concern to me is a teacher using 'earnt' as if it is proper English!

dearlouise

Spidernick wrote: »

As explained above, it will all come out in the wash. What is of more concern to me is a teacher using 'earnt' as if it is proper English!

Really? Oh go away.
Firstly I wrote this on a mobile phone, at lunch, in a rush.
Secondly I'm not an English teacher so it doesn't really matter.
Thirdly, I don't claim to be perfect. Does any teacher? Do you realise teachers are......... Human? Yes I may triple check my work before it goes to students... I certainly don't do that on a forum!

Should I go on? Because I can if you like.

Cardinal-Red

Spidernick wrote: »

As explained above, it will all come out in the wash. What is of more concern to me is a teacher using 'earnt' as if it is proper English!

This is a ridiculous response.

And in any case, I am pretty sure "earnt" is a perfectly acceptable past participle of "earn"

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/earnt

Sorry to derail the thread.

Cardinal-Red

dearlouise wrote: »

I'm a teacher earning approx 24k. I have debt I'm trying to reduce so spent the 6 weeks working and will probably work in other holidays if possible.

What I earnt from the summer job wasn't a lot, about £2.5k & I paid basic rate tax.

Got a letter from hmrc saying I'll now be charged 40% on any earning from the summer job employer... I don't understand why. As I haven't gone above the threshold?

I wanted to know if this was right as they've asked me to work during half term and it's just not worth it if I'm going to pay 40% tax. ��:(

What does the letter from HMRC actually say - is your paragraph a summary?

Is it actually a coding notice saying that your employer will use D0 code?

As a previous poster suggests, this should be BR based on what you state your salary is. Have a look at your main payslips and see what tax code is printed there too?

If you do this fast enough, then it should work out as an adjustment next time you are paid by the second company; providing that you haven't been issued a P45 by them at the end of summer?

Spidernick

dearlouise wrote: »

Really? Oh go away.
Firstly I wrote this on a mobile phone, at lunch, in a rush.
Secondly I'm not an English teacher so it doesn't really matter.
Thirdly, I don't claim to be perfect. Does any teacher? Do you realise teachers are......... Human? Yes I may triple check my work before it goes to students... I certainly don't do that on a forum!

Should I go on? Because I can if you like.

I wasn't sure whether to reply to this, or just let it ride.

I didn't mean to offend you (and my comment was half light-hearted) but I find your comment that 'it doesn't really matter' a little worrying for someone who is educating our children. Of course it matters, whether you are an English teacher or not. Ask yourself this question: What would your response be to a pupil who came up with the 'excuses' you have listed above (and any others should you choose to go on)? I think you would give them short shrift and rightly so.

I'm glad that you triple check your work with students, but would you not agree that by not doing this all the time there is a danger that people can get into bad habits? I'm sure you are better equipped to comment than me, but aren't there lots of children these days extending 'text speak' into their day-to-day work? It is not a good habit for anyone to get into in my opinion.

Anyway, apologies for going off track and upsetting you with my (admittedly) flippant remark. Hopefully your tax will get sorted out soon.

Cardinal-Red,

I'd be very wary of using wikipedia to back up your arguments (and calling mine 'ridiculous'), as wikipedia is notorious for being often wrong. The only way 'earnt' is entering common English is through constant misuse so it becomes the norm - it is incredibly bad English and almost as bad as 'should of'. It is revolution, not evolution of the language. The latter is entirely acceptable, the former is not.

shop-to-drop

I imagine it looks to HMRC that you are going to continue earning from the second job continually on top of your teachers wages and that is why you go into higher tax.

In actually fact you will not earn enough to do so over the financial year so need not worry. If you over pay tax at some point you can claim it back. A call to HmRC however won't do any harm if you can spare the time.

Cardinal-Red

Spidernick wrote: »

Cardinal-Red,

I'd be very wary of using wikipedia to back up your arguments (and calling mine 'ridiculous'), as wikipedia is notorious for being often wrong. The only way 'earnt' is entering common English is through constant misuse so it becomes the norm - it is incredibly bad English and almost as bad as 'should of'. It is revolution, not evolution of the language. The latter is entirely acceptable, the former is not.

I too didn't want to make this an issue, but I am afraid you're wrong.

Wikipedia is indeed often wrong, but that doesn't mean that it is always wrong. Your statement is as valid as me replying "I'd be very wary of criticising Wikipedia as a back up to an argument as it is notorious for being often right."

I did not respond on the basis of the link I used, it just so happens that in this case it's right. Earnt is also not new - it has been around for hundreds of years, so is hardly a revolution.

Anyway, you stated that your comment was meant to be light-hearted and so I don't see any point in wasting any more time, so I won't.