Many of you would have heard about the Loan Charge, but what is it and why might you be affected?
The Loan Charge is a piece of legislation that was introduced in the Finance Act 2017. It went largely unnoticed at the time, but its far reaching consequences are now being felt by a large number of self-employed contractors.
What brought about the Loan Charge in the first place?
Until about 15 years ago, many contractors were working through their own personal service companies when carrying out contract work. They were able to be paid gross, allowing them flexibility over the amounts and timings of tax and National Insurance they needed to pay. It all worked like clockwork!
This all changed, however, when the intermediaries legislation, IR35, was introduced, which was meant to deal with counter avoidance by the aforementioned individuals. This created a problem for those contractors who were used to being paid without deductions at source.
A solution to this appeared in the form of umbrella companies offering to act as the employer for these contractors. It had the added benefit that their income could be structured, avoiding what the contractors saw as the punitive rates of tax and National Insurance under IR35.
In many cases, this involved the use of Employee Benefit Trusts (EBTs). These EBTs were set up by umbrella companies to receive payments from their employees’ contracts. In turn, the contractors received a basic salary from the umbrella company (which often attracted little or no tax or National Insurance) and then a loan from the EBT. The loans were treated as benefits in kind for the contractors and, accordingly, tax and National Insurance was paid on the beneficial loan interest value of those loans, although this was often a very small amount, relative to the amount of the loan.
Due to the nature of the loan payments, however, they were classed as tax avoidance schemes and, as such, were required to be notified to HMRC under the Disclosure of Tax Avoidance Schemes legislation (DOTAS). This meant that users of the scheme had to disclose this fact on their annual tax returns.
The big problem, though, was that many of these loans were never repayable, and even where there was an intention for the loans to be repaid to the EBT, in reality that never happened. So, in effect, they were just another form of remuneration, disguised as a loan. As such, HMRC’s view is that these “payments” should have attracted tax and National Insurance deductions at the time.
Embarrassingly for HMRC, by the time it realised what was going on, several years had passed. When it finally woke-up to the issue, tens of thousands (and possibly over 100,000) contractors were using these types of schemes. But without new legislation, there was nothing HMRC could do.
We’re told that, initially, HMRC attempted to approach these scheme providers to collect the tax and National Insurance it claimed was due. The problem was, though, that most contractors were using schemes based in the Isle of Man, and many of the providers had subsequently shut down. This meant HMRC only had one place to turn to; yep, the users of the schemes!
New Legislation
Roll forward to 2016 and HMRC put pressure on Government to introduce a charge to income (payable by the contractor) for any loans which had not been repaid by 5 April this year.
This change was enacted in the Finance Act 20171. Broadly speaking, this determines that any loans made since 1999 and still outstanding, will need to be disclosed as self-employment income for 2018/19, unless the taxpayer has reached a settlement with HMRC. For most taxpayers, this will give rise to a tax charge at least 20% of the amount owing. For higher rate tax payers, however, this could mean paying a 40% (or even 45%) tax charge.
The Options
There are a number of options available to those contractors caught by the Loan Charge.
- Enter into a Settlement Agreement with HMRC
Recognising that for some, this would result in some fairly hefty tax liabilities, HMRC has set about persuading those contractors affected to settle. In general, settlement means giving HMRC permission to re-assess the tax payable in each of the earlier years in which a contractor was paid a loan. HMRC has attempted to sweeten the deal by offering contractors on low incomes extended periods of time (up to 7 years) to pay the tax arising. In theory, this should result in a lower amount of tax being paid than under the Loan Charge calculation, but this should not be assumed.
There are a number of issues with this option, which many commentators have already raised with HMRC and, more recently, the Treasury Committee2. The first is that, ordinarily, HMRC is only permitted to open an enquiry into earlier tax years in two circumstances. These are (1) if it believes the taxpayer has been careless in completing his or her returns, or (2) if it believes the taxpayer has deliberately excluded income from his or her tax return. In the first of these instances, HMRC can go back six years, but in the case of deliberate errors this is extended to 20 years.
However, as many have argued, it’s hard to see how either of these circumstances exists. After all, most of those affected used a qualified accountant to prepare their returns (hardly careless) and full disclosure was made of the fact that they were using these avoidance schemes under DOTAS (so nothing was deliberately withheld).
Interestingly, it would seem that HMRC can only open enquiries into these earlier years in the event the taxpayer agrees to settle.
Arguably, this is the most straightforward option to administer. Provided the details of the outstanding loans are available (which may not be the case), then this option requires contractors simply declaring the loan balance as self-employed income on their 2018/19 tax return. The tax and Class 4 National Insurance arising on the loans would need to be paid by 31 January 2020, along with other tax and National Insurance liabilities.
One of the main problems with this option is that the contractor is still liable for the loans and could be called upon to repay the loan at a future date. It is unclear what would happen if they were repaid after 5 April, but is seems that tax relief will not be given – even if tax had been paid under the Loan Charge in 2018/19. I can foresee this becoming a significant problem for HMRC and Government which they have not anticipated.
It is worth noting that just because a contractor decides to include their disguised remuneration loans in their 2018/19 tax return, it does not mean that HMRC cannot open an enquiry into these loans, since it will be covered by the normal time limits for such an enquiry in respect of the 2018/19 return.
Another problem is that HMRC could still seek payment of inheritance tax, if it determines there has been a distribution from the EBT. In addition, there is also talk of HMRC treating the payments of the scheme providers’ fees as non-tax deductible (meaning that tax would be payable on these amounts as well).
One way to avoid the Loan Charge and any need to settle your liabilities with HMRC, is simply to repay the outstanding loans. If no loans are outstanding at 5 April 2019, then no tax or National Insurance will arise.
It’s important to recognise that any loan repayment prior to 5 April, must meet strict criteria (for example, payment cannot be facilitated by entering into another tax avoidance arrangement) and the taxpayer might be called upon to provide evidence to HMRC of the repayments being made from taxed income or a commercial loan.
- Dispute HMRC’s right to make the Loan Charge
Surprisingly, many experts and politicians are beginning to challenge HMRC on the legitimacy of the Loan Charge legislation in relation to the rights of contractors as taxpayers.
It seems possible that even at this late stage, there may still be some changes to the implementation of the new charges. Whilst I think this is a very interesting development, HMRC seems doggedly determined to stick by its guns. So taking this option would be a high risk strategy.
What should you do?
It is revealing that HMRC seems to be making very little effort in helping contractors with assessing the options available, namely to either settle or pay the Loan Charge. We believe HMRC are misleading contractors (unintentionally or otherwise) by suggesting that the best option is to settle rather than pay the Loan Charge. For the majority, this could well be the case, but in the cases we have seen, there would appear to be a significant minority for whom the Loan Charge is actually the preferable option.
In a recent Twitter poll, we asked contractors which option they are planning to take. The results make interesting reading.
Out of 197 voters, 66 (33%), said they intended to settle with HMRC and 57 (29%) said they planned to pay the Loan Charge. But 74 (38%) said they were planning to do neither of these options. This would seem to reflect HMRC’s own experiences. At the recent Treasury Select Committee meeting on 30th January, HMRC indicated that, so far, 9,000 contractors had been offered settlement agreements from an estimated 50,000.
So it would seem the settlement offer from HMRC is not overwhelmingly attractive for those impacted and it will be interesting to see what happens when some contractors, who have settled, realise they have potentially been duped into accepting a worse offer than the tax payable under the Loan Charge.
It is worth mentioning that if your other income for 2018/19 is below the basic rate of tax and you are not receiving any means tested benefits, paying the Loan Charge may be an attractive option – particularly if you are able to claim reliefs for pension contributions. This course of action might also be helpful if you are looking to secure a mortgage based on your taxable income for 2018/19.
But if you’re not concerned about HMRC opening earlier tax years, then settlement may be the best route. Be advised, however, that time is running out if you want to take advantage of this option (the deadline being 5 April 2019).
Repaying the loan does seem to be the least attractive option, since the amounts to be repaid will be considerably higher than the amount of tax which is payable. But if an alternative distribution from the EBT could be agreed with the scheme provider, this could make it attractive. To be clear though, replacing one tax avoidance scheme with another will fall foul of the Loan Charge legislation, so any distribution would need to be taxable as income.
It would be understandable if you find none of the above options particularly attractive, and you might be tempted to fight HMRC and hope the problem goes away. There’s no doubt of the political pressure building on HMRC, but I would not hold my breath in anticipation of any change soon.
Whatever you decide to do, make sure you weigh up the above options carefully because choosing the wrong option could end up being a costly mistake.
If you are a self-employed contractor who feels caught about the best way forward with the Loan Charge, please contact us as soon as possible on 020 7965 7338. We will do all we can to help you find the most appropriate resolution given your specific circumstances.
NOTES
1The relevant section of the Finance Act 2017 can be found by following this link:
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2017/32/schedule/11/enacted?view=plain
2If you want to hear the proceedings from the Treasury Select Committee held on 30 January where the Loan Charge was discussed, please follow this link:
https://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/fe9b708b-7752-4d0f-9bd3-fc44608eaae8