After the Universal Startup Period?

calcotti

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/787442/admh4.pdf

"The gainful self-employment test: organised, developed, regular and in expectation of profit

H4050 In order to determine if the S/E activity is organised, developed, regular and carried on in expectation of profit, the DM should take into account

1 whether the activity is undertaken for financial gain

2 the number of hours spent each week on the work

3 any business plan or steps taken to increase income from the activity

4 how HMRC regard the activity

5 how much work is in the pipeline

6 whether the claimant is actively marketing or advertising for work.

The above is not exhaustive.”

Subsequent paragraphs go into more detail.

NedS said:
There is no consideration given to earnings when considering if someone is gainfully self employed. It makes no difference if you are earning £150, £1500, or £15,000/month.

EDIT: Other than HMRCs limit of £1000 a year to be considered self employed

Ned, If someone does the occasional bit of work for which they are paid but is looking for employment their income from the odd jobs is obviously more than from employment which is one of of the tests used to determine if someone is employed or self employed but surely DWP cannot insist on treating someone as self employed unless they can demonstrate the above test is met. Surely also if a claimant says I want to be employed, I am looking for employment but in the meantime I'll try and grab a bit of money on a self employed basis where I can this shouldn't result in them being treated as self-employed.

Galloglass

After the startup period finishes I then have eight months until I get the State Pension! I am getting too old and too tired for all this poncing around! Still I will give this self-employment my best shot and who knows, maybe the best is yet to come???

It will all come down to the facts and the individual. A younger person (no ageism intended) has more incentive to build a business which becomes the pension if the business sold. It is a commonly understood concept. But in this case, the OP appears to be meeting the instructions given but with the intent to move to state pension when possible. 

It could be argued that to all intents, the person is not S/E but is doing the odd bit of work. But from the DWP management of the case, both parties appear to have adopted the illusion of S/E as the OP doesn't want managed and the DWP work coach can't see the point given the SRA is approaching. 

We may be reading too much into the regulations and ignoring the practicalities. 

tomtom256

calcotti said:

NedS said:
There is no consideration given to earnings when considering if someone is gainfully self employed. It makes no difference if you are earning £150, £1500, or £15,000/month.

EDIT: Other than HMRCs limit of £1000 a year to be considered self employed

Ned, If someone does the occasional bit of work for which they are paid but is looking for employment their income from the odd jobs is obviously more than from employment which is one of of the tests used to determine if someone is employed or self employed but surely DWP cannot insist on treating someone as self employed unless they can demonstrate the above test is met. Surely also if a claimant says I want to be employed, I am looking for employment but in the meantime I'll try and grab a bit of money on a self employed basis where I can this shouldn't result in them being treated as self-employed.

calcotti in the scenario you are giving, they would potentially be not gainfully self employe, but would still need to report any self employed income and then stay in the intensvie regime and be seen weekly or fortnightly as per current mandation requirements.

Spoonie_Turtle

tomtom256 said:

calcotti said:

NedS said:
There is no consideration given to earnings when considering if someone is gainfully self employed. It makes no difference if you are earning £150, £1500, or £15,000/month.

EDIT: Other than HMRCs limit of £1000 a year to be considered self employed

Ned, If someone does the occasional bit of work for which they are paid but is looking for employment their income from the odd jobs is obviously more than from employment which is one of of the tests used to determine if someone is employed or self employed but surely DWP cannot insist on treating someone as self employed unless they can demonstrate the above test is met. Surely also if a claimant says I want to be employed, I am looking for employment but in the meantime I'll try and grab a bit of money on a self employed basis where I can this shouldn't result in them being treated as self-employed.

calcotti in the scenario you are giving, they would potentially be not gainfully self employe, but would still need to report any self employed income and then stay in the intensvie regime and be seen weekly or fortnightly as per current mandation requirements.

This is true, but the point is that if they're earning a pittance then being in the intensive regime is better than having the MIF applied and ending up with nothing to live on.

tomtom256

Spoonie_Turtle said:

tomtom256 said:

calcotti said:

NedS said:
There is no consideration given to earnings when considering if someone is gainfully self employed. It makes no difference if you are earning £150, £1500, or £15,000/month.

EDIT: Other than HMRCs limit of £1000 a year to be considered self employed

Ned, If someone does the occasional bit of work for which they are paid but is looking for employment their income from the odd jobs is obviously more than from employment which is one of of the tests used to determine if someone is employed or self employed but surely DWP cannot insist on treating someone as self employed unless they can demonstrate the above test is met. Surely also if a claimant says I want to be employed, I am looking for employment but in the meantime I'll try and grab a bit of money on a self employed basis where I can this shouldn't result in them being treated as self-employed.

calcotti in the scenario you are giving, they would potentially be not gainfully self employe, but would still need to report any self employed income and then stay in the intensvie regime and be seen weekly or fortnightly as per current mandation requirements.

This is true, but the point is that if they're earning a pittance then being in the intensive regime is better than having the MIF applied and ending up with nothing to live on.

That is true spoonie, however it's the customers choice to stay self-employed, the work coach, makes the GSE/not GSE decision, based on information and evidence provided by the customer.

If they do not want to cease trading etc, then they, the customer, impose the MIF on themselves. A lot of people don't/won't admit their business isn't working for them and the MIF forces their hand so to speak to make a decision regarding it.

Spoonie_Turtle

tomtom256 said:

Spoonie_Turtle said:

tomtom256 said:

calcotti said:

NedS said:
There is no consideration given to earnings when considering if someone is gainfully self employed. It makes no difference if you are earning £150, £1500, or £15,000/month.

EDIT: Other than HMRCs limit of £1000 a year to be considered self employed

Ned, If someone does the occasional bit of work for which they are paid but is looking for employment their income from the odd jobs is obviously more than from employment which is one of of the tests used to determine if someone is employed or self employed but surely DWP cannot insist on treating someone as self employed unless they can demonstrate the above test is met. Surely also if a claimant says I want to be employed, I am looking for employment but in the meantime I'll try and grab a bit of money on a self employed basis where I can this shouldn't result in them being treated as self-employed.

calcotti in the scenario you are giving, they would potentially be not gainfully self employe, but would still need to report any self employed income and then stay in the intensvie regime and be seen weekly or fortnightly as per current mandation requirements.

This is true, but the point is that if they're earning a pittance then being in the intensive regime is better than having the MIF applied and ending up with nothing to live on.

That is true spoonie, however it's the customers choice to stay self-employed, the work coach, makes the GSE/not GSE decision, based on information and evidence provided by the customer.

If they do not want to cease trading etc, then they, the customer, impose the MIF on themselves. A lot of people don't/won't admit their business isn't working for them and the MIF forces their hand so to speak to make a decision regarding it.

Generally yes, but I was commenting in the context of the OP  

NedS

calcotti said:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/787442/admh4.pdf

"The gainful self-employment test: organised, developed, regular and in expectation of profit

H4050 In order to determine if the S/E activity is organised, developed, regular and carried on in expectation of profit, the DM should take into account

1 whether the activity is undertaken for financial gain

2 the number of hours spent each week on the work

3 any business plan or steps taken to increase income from the activity

4 how HMRC regard the activity

5 how much work is in the pipeline

6 whether the claimant is actively marketing or advertising for work.

The above is not exhaustive.”

Subsequent paragraphs go into more detail.

NedS said:
There is no consideration given to earnings when considering if someone is gainfully self employed. It makes no difference if you are earning £150, £1500, or £15,000/month.

EDIT: Other than HMRCs limit of £1000 a year to be considered self employed

Ned, If someone does the occasional bit of work for which they are paid but is looking for employment their income from the odd jobs is obviously more than from employment which is one of of the tests used to determine if someone is employed or self employed but surely DWP cannot insist on treating someone as self employed unless they can demonstrate the above test is met. Surely also if a claimant says I want to be employed, I am looking for employment but in the meantime I'll try and grab a bit of money on a self employed basis where I can this shouldn't result in them being treated as self-employed.

Yes, agreed. My point was simply that nowhere in the above, or in the list of points a DM should take into consideration above, does it actually mention how much they earn as a consideration. Someone could have just started a new business and have zero income (or even a loss), but they are conducting the business with the expectation of profit and can still be gainfully self employed.

However, you are absolutely right that a lot depends on the claimants intentions, but that is a different point completely to the point I made.

calcotti

NedS said:
However, you are absolutely right that a lot depends on the claimants intentions, but that is a different point completely to the point I made.

Apologies if you thought I was trying to contradict you. That wasn’t my intention. The bit above the ADM quote was just trying to provide additional information for OP and the question below was to explore the general issue further.

calcotti

See also
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/787442/admh4.pdf#page=13

“H4032 The S/E activity is unlikely to be the claimant’s main employment where the claimant

1. undertakes only S/E activity and that activity occupies significantly less than half the expected hours or

2. undertakes S/E and employed earners activity and the S/E activity takes up more time than time spent on employed activity but still only represents a small proportion of the expected hours of work (but also have regard to H4034 1.)

H4034 The S/E activity is likely to be the claimant’s main employment where the claimant

1. undertakes S/E activity for a small number of hours each week but is

receiving a high hourly return on the activity or

2. works more hours on employed earners employment but receives a greater

proportion of their income from S/E activity.“