|
In an article on the ContractorCalculator it's stated that FBT Mark 2 or Son-of-a-FBT as we'll call it for the meanwhile is to be specifically targeted at "contractors". We are taking "contractors" to mean "freelancers", but who knows? What is apparently the case is that HMG wants to target this ill-conceived proposal so it excludes the wide range of family businesses it would have originally punished. We think that's so many family businesses can breathe a sigh of relief and won't feel need to protest. Clever strategy, eh readers - divide and conquer?
One hand, meet the other handSo, is this the final admission of the truth? Does HMG really, really hate the contracting community and does it wish to persecute it out of existence? We could do with Fox Mulder and Dana Scully on the case because the evidence is all there.
DBERR (the new-ish name for the DTI) encourages a flexible workforce, whilst HMRC/HM Treasury persecutes it.
Rough estimates are that the UK's freelancers contribute £100 billion (yes, you read that right, £100 billion) a year to the economy and DBERR wlecomes the flexibility that freelancers bring to the party - special projects can get done efficiently and quickly by freelancers whilst a business gets on with its mainstream activities. HMRC/HMT don't see it that way - they see these pesky contractors as nothing more than cash cows for the tax system and have already introduced a wide range of new taxes specifically targetting freelancers. Brilliant joined-up policy, chaps, keep it up. Ready, aim, fire! Now HMRC/HMT seem to want to target only contractors with Son-of-a-FBT. Why could that be? Is it perhaps because they know from past experience that the wider range of small family businesses can squeal quite loudly and that going after just one section, albeit a very important one to UK plc, will be easier for them. Well, we can only hope that PCG defends ALL family businesses once more and puts a stop to this piece of nonsense. After all - if the contractors go down this time, who's next?
|
