WTC - Director - Company profit???

marliepanda

Darksparkle wrote: »

Yes but that doesn’t say you MUST earn NMW.

The OP doesnt say he is being asked to pay NMW, it has been mentioned in passing by other people, including my assertation that if it cant pay NMW after 4 years then whats the point.

OP is saying they are saying the company has to be profitable, which could potentially be a much smaller ask than NMW for 30 hours. However, after 4 years the OP can not even do this.

Darksparkle

marliepanda wrote: »

The OP doesnt say he is being asked to pay NMW, it has been mentioned in passing by other people, including my assertation that if it cant pay NMW after 4 years then whats the point.

OP is saying they are saying the company has to be profitable, which could potentially be a much smaller ask than NMW for 30 hours. However, after 4 years the OP can not even do this.

My comments are directed towards Pennywise, which is why I have quoted pennywise. Pennywise stated the OP must earn NMW. Pennywise also stated that the claim would be based on working hours x NMW. Both of these statement are wrong.

marliepanda

Darksparkle wrote: »

My comments are directed towards Pennywise, which is why I have quoted pennywise. Pennywise stated the OP must earn NMW. Pennywise also stated that the claim would be based on working hours x NMW. Both of these statement are wrong.

But this still brings me back to my earlier comment, that what is the right answer?

Regardless of how and why they are telling the OP he isn't entitled to WTC, they are telling him that. Its very clear why, they are not there to handhold people with their businesses. Being a director is not intended to be a safe ground between being SE and employed where you can do what you want.

Darksparkle

marliepanda wrote: »

But this still brings me back to my earlier comment, that what is the right answer?

Regardless of how and why they are telling the OP he isn't entitled to WTC, they are telling him that. Its very clear why, they are not there to handhold people with their businesses. Being a director is not intended to be a safe ground between being SE and employed where you can do what you want.

Where did I say it was? I haven’t said I agree with the OPs claim to WTC but the OP has came on for advice so giving them incorrect information on NMW or referring to self employed rules aren’t going to help.

They will have told the OP on what basis they don’t agree with the claim and if the OP doesn’t agree then the next stage will be to appeal the decision.

gettingtheresometime

On the assumption that the OP is a director of the Ltd company, we were advised by our accountant that the most tax efficient amount to take out of the company as salary is somewhere near £8k so no where near NMW.


The issue is that after 4 years the business is not in a position to pay the OP a salary of any sort and that as a result WTC aren't going to be paid anymore.


Now I have no idea what sort of business the OP runs but clearly the OP either needs to get a part time job that does pay and run the company as a side line until its in a position to pay a salary or shut up shop completely and get a full time job.


Its a tough call when you've spent so long trying to build something up but if it isn't making any money, why bother?

WorriedinSussex

Hi and thanks again for your input.
So do I take it that the 'your business must be profitable' rule doesn't actually appear in any HMRC WTC guidance or have I missed something?
HMRC have changed their approach to this over the last few months. In fact every letter/telephone conversation is a new angle and more time wasted.
In the recent past we had something of a tousle with HMRC - VAT regarding interpretation of their rules. It took time to take it to tribunal but when we did, after a lot of hot air and threats they had nothing useful to say in court - just two old men mumbling into their paperwork. It was nice to take them to school but it took a couple of years and 200 + emails between me and my representative.

For me HMRC have a solid track record of mendacity and obfuscation which I feel is unacceptable, particularly when dealing with benefits. People's lives can be complicated and fragile, abusing their position is cheap and does them a great dis-service. Let's not forget this is our government...

If anyone has anything to add I would be grateful to hear it but please keep emotion out of it. This is about my benefits, not your perception of who or what I may or may not be.
Thanks again for your input.

Comms69

WorriedinSussex wrote: »

Hi and thanks again for your input.
So do I take it that the 'your business must be profitable' rule doesn't actually appear in any HMRC WTC guidance or have I missed something?
HMRC have changed their approach to this over the last few months. In fact every letter/telephone conversation is a new angle and more time wasted.
In the recent past we had something of a tousle with HMRC - VAT regarding interpretation of their rules. It took time to take it to tribunal but when we did, after a lot of hot air and threats they had nothing useful to say in court - just two old men mumbling into their paperwork. It was nice to take them to school but it took a couple of years and 200 + emails between me and my representative.

For me HMRC have a solid track record of mendacity and obfuscation which I feel is unacceptable, particularly when dealing with benefits. People's lives can be complicated and fragile, abusing their position is cheap and does them a great dis-service. Let's not forget this is our government...

If anyone has anything to add I would be grateful to hear it but please keep emotion out of it. This is about my benefits, not your perception of who or what I may or may not be.
Thanks again for your input.

It's a public forum; if you want to hear only what you like, pay someone to say it to you.

Darksparkle

The condition you need to meet is condition four - The work must be done for payment or in expectation of payment.

https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/tax-credits-technical-manual/tctm02411