Hello all

sammyjammy

Its clear your aim is to deceive, its people like you that give bankruptcy a bad name.

BobBasket

"Keep telling myself it will be fine"

Obviously that what I'm looking to do? why are you acting like I shouldnt be, I'm coming to the forum gain advice on the matter, one responder has said it's ok (let's call him the devil on the shoulder for sake of making a point) as long as I don't undertake any director duties (which I won't)

Your response falls under the category of the (Angel on the shoulder)
"I know you're doing it, even if you're doing it legally, I know she's a front regardless of her running the business independently from the work I do as an employee"

Commenting that hardly any other one-man bands would do as I suggest, is your opinion,

The percentage of insolvent individuals who are capable of being an employee whilst working for a relative or friend would likely be less than 10% of all insolvent individuals in total. (the majority would gain employment with an established business or simply remain unemployed)

To follow on further, the percent of one man band ltd companies acting with an insolvent employee in the grand scheme of all ltd one man bands would also be less than 10% as well (simply due to the fact insolvent individuals make up less than 10% of the employment pool)

Obviously my percentages may be higher or lower than the actual insolvency rates, as I have no evidence to cite,

The point you make about how many one man bands would do as I suggest isn't an accurate statement to prove its not a valid idea, it's like saying a gym is unlikely to hire fat people to be personal trainers, because they are fat (it's highly unlikely anyway due to the number of obese people that would actively want to be a gym PT in the first place, not impossible, however, just highly unlikely)

So I would agree that there aren't many one man band ltd companies doing what I propose, but are their none, I wouldn't say so.

I don't think the percentages are relevant to my question.

But I do understand by the letter of the law that if I'm found to be acting as a shadow director I will be punished severely as it is illegal, and that is your only concern to provide me with the advice based on my obvious attempt technically to have a ltd company whilst bankrupt, in all sense of the matter excluding the role.

But I would not partake in any director/company roles beyond my job description as an employee, my partner would run the business (I think her trade knowledge is mute when it comes to owning a business, if she has employees carrying out the work required)

BobBasket

sammyjammy wrote: »

Its clear your aim is to deceive, its people like you that give bankruptcy a bad name.

I would imagine at least 50% (I would imagine it's actually closer to 70%+) of people who are bankrupt deceive, by working a minimum wage job to avoid an IPA.

There's no guarantee I'll obtain an income high enough to pay an IPA anyway regardless of gaining employment with an established business.

So working for a relative or a business gaining minimum wage avoiding an IPA equates to the same thing, either way, no IPA, so not sure how I can give bankruptcy a bad name.

You could sit and argue the ethical, moral points all day, but that's not my query.

Had I started a post saying "Should I just get a low paying job to avoid an IPA" your response of "your the type of person that gives bankruptcy a bad name would also apply.

Yet I would imagine 50-70% do it, unless they are blessed with the qualifications to get a well paid job, I've sadly been out of higher education for over 15 years, so my qualifications of HND are not exactly guaranteeing me a good income job.

TheGardener

BobBasket wrote: »

I would imagine at least 50% (I would imagine it's actually closer to 70%+) of people who are bankrupt deceive, by working a minimum wage job to avoid an IPA..

…

Well Bobbasket - after 6 years on this forum I have to say that is probably the most outrageous, misguided and completely untrue statement I've ever seen posted. Working a Min wage to avoid an IPA!? The vast majority of BR's are actually ordinary people in ordinary jobs who do have IPA's and just carry on working as an employee (as they were before). You clearly have a completely unrealistic understanding of BR and who goes BR. You need a reality check and if you are not prepared to hear it from us because its not the 'advice' you wanted to hear - then carry on and I'm sure the OR will disabuse you of your views smartly.
Good luck.

BobBasket

TheGardener wrote: »

…

Well Bobbasket - after 6 years on this forum I have to say that is probably the most outrageous, misguided and completely untrue statement I've ever seen posted. Working a Min wage to avoid an IPA!? The vast majority of BR's are actually ordinary people in ordinary jobs who do have IPA's and just carry on working as an employee (as they were before). You clearly have a completely unrealistic understanding of BR and who goes BR. You need a reality check and if you are not prepared to hear it from us because its not the 'advice' you wanted to hear - then carry on and I'm sure the OR will disabuse you of your views smartly.
Good luck.

Guess you must have missed the dozens of threads on here where people state they want to avoid paying an IPA by lowering their wage/hours or simply avoiding work altogether.

Nice attempt to jump on the lynch mob bandwagon all the same. Plenty of people avoid paying an IPA, it must be next level looking at the world through those rose-tinted specs of yours.

I'll work for a company at minimum wage to avoid the IPA thanks for the legal advice.
OR wouldn't do anything of the sort, with proof of my employment, what are they going to do, as I've stated multiple times my partner would run the business 100% as a director, not my fault you choose to twist my words to fit your argument, same with the other two rent-a-cops

If my partner opened up a corner shop and took me on as a staff member, there would be NO difference whatsoever between the two examples.

I got the answer I was looking for simply from you three saying "that's naughty, bad boy" your responses are proof enough that my idea is perfectly above board.

I couldn't care less about ethics or morals at this stage in the game.

warby68

There's a difference between working a minimum wage job and working a well paid job but hiding that income in a company.

If you are the only employee (ie only income generator) of that company then it won't take much to see through it should anyone be so inclined.

Also if the type of work generates a higher income but your employer doesn't pay you that, again quite transparent.

You are talking about a shell business sheltering your income, not a bigger business where it might be easier to stick someone on the books ostensibily as the tea person. Your example above , the corner shop, legitimately has minimum wage jobs. Your planned single person skilled contracting business does not.

You really expect a legitimate advice board to condone your 'no ethics, no morals' stance?

WhenIam64

@ Bob

Rather than the label you might be given here, you might want to check what label the IS may give you. If is is a "shadow director", you could have a problem. Here is a guide so you can check

https://www.city.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/133937/Shadow-Director.pdf

If you know you are a director, even if not in name, then you should insist on being covered by all relevant insurances and you should make sure you know your legal duties. In the unlikely event that you are an undischarged bankrupt or have been disqualified from being a director, then it is a criminal offence to act even as a shadow director.

BoGoF

I genuinely don't know why people like OP come asking for advice. It is obvious they have made their own mind up and make up nonsense to validate their own viewpoint.

TheGardener

BobBasket wrote: »

...I couldn't care less about ethics or morals at this stage in the game...

Says it all really - Jog on Bob..;)

RattyIrk

I did read that IPAs are only imposed on about one in five cases.

Think the basic rule is if you take on a lower paid role than you could get elsewhere is do not hide anything from the OR. I'm sure many people deliberately take on lower paid roles to avoid an IPA. It can often make better long term sense.