Meh, the gall of the typo king… 
More the highlighting of your hypocrisy. Ironic given the forum title you gave me. Yours does sum up your “contributions”, though. 
Haha, it seems my most useful contribution is being your trollee of choice, who else would give you that fix?
1 Like
“Contribution”, lol.
1 Like
I’m not talking about ‘state benefits’ I’m talking about things like sick pay, maternity pay, holiday pay, company car, etc. All that comes out of the contractors own pocket.
Yes you can try to get them written into your contract but why would an employer agree to pay maternity or holiday pay if they didn’t have to?
I’ve never understood why the government taxes “savings income” (including dividends) less than earned income (such as employment). I think it should be taxed more - if people have so much money saved that they actually have proper involved from it, they can afford to be taxed.
This would have the happy side effect of blowing all the one person limited companies that pay their sole director a pittance in salary and the rest in divis out of the water. Good riddance.
I have no problem with contractors earning more to offset the lack of benefits, but I do have an issue with them having tax benefits as well.
1 Like
Some things you must price in, holiday pay, car etc, surely. I’m quite used to sitting alongside contractors on twenty grand more and all I got was a constant drip about holiday pay and, in equal measure, about how much less tax they paid compared to when employed. They were all ex civil service or navy engineers. I may have quite a stilted view as a result.
Because that is their main income source
Less tax not so much any more but I’m sure a good accountant could wrangle something.
The big thing about contracting is that there is no guarantee of work. So you should price in some down months too. As a paye employee even if the company has no work you still get paid-up until the point the company goes pop and has to downsize etc.
It’s risk vs reward the contractor has more at risk so gets a bigger reward.
I definitely pay less tax as a director of my own business compared to when I was a PAYE director in some-one elses.
But then again I run a business that has to pay the wages for 4 full time employees and at the moment 4 associates, and I also have to create a margin to invest in the business to keep it relevant and able to win work.
If there weren’t any tax or overall income advantages then from a financial point I’d be asking myself why bother. Its a lot of risk when I could very easily just go take a safe and steady exec director job with all the perks and pension etc.
3 Likes
I have done a fair amount of contracting and it accounted for fourteen years out of the forty that I worked. I was rarely sick and was always working. Direct comparison calculations that I did at the time showed contracting paid between 30 - 40% more and I paid much less tax.
I was a contractor for about 10 years. Rolled the dice and didn’t take out any kind of insurance. Got ill so missed out on about a year’s income and ended up paying a large chunk of cash for medical treatment out of my own pocket. My choices again and again so I can hardly whine about it.
Ironically I later went permie (not really my choice) and my employer’s health coverage paid for my wife’s medical treatment 
1 Like
If I had been a contractor we would have been financially ruined. We would have had to move up north, realised the equity in the house and live off the wife’s income. That would have been a strain on everything, really.
Ultimately I think that contracting makes good sense for some jobs and some people, but too often it’s used badly, so that the employer can avoid obligations and employee can avoid tax.
I don’t understand, you’re of the opinion contractors get paid over the odds and pay less tax?
How many contractors take out income protection insurance?
All the sensible and well advised ones I would think. I pay considerable premiums for that kind of income protection for my company, and maintain a healthy cash position at all times to ensure that we can continue to pay peoples income until it kicks in, in the event of a claim, or if work is not available for a period of time.
But that’s part of what the additional earning power and lower tax is for…
No, it’s what the additional earnings are for
No, its what you think the additional earnings are for, because you begrudge other people in different circumstances paying less tax.
Those actually running businesses and having to make these provisions have to manage the reality of things, and will see things quite differently.
I have run a business, employing about a dozen people. They were all employees, and I paid myself through salary.
So what?
Or are you trying to somehow extrapolate your experience, circumstances and personal choices onto a couple of million businesses whose scenarios will be very different to yours?