Taxation logo taxation mission text

Since 1927 the leading authority on tax law, practice and administration
Home Saved articles Viewed items Login Contact Free Trial
|

Fund access

© Copyright LexisNexis 2024. All rights reserved.

09 February 2005
Issue: 3994 / Categories: Forum & Feedback , Arctic Systems , IR35 , Jones v. Garnett
We have a client company with a sole director/shareholder. The Inland Revenue has agreed that the company is not within the IR35 rules. The company supplies quality assurance services. Currently, it has £200,000 in the bank and has no other significant assets or liabilities. The director intends trading for the foreseeable future. In addition to running his own company, the director is also a full-time employee of another, unconnected, company and any dividend from his business will therefore be taxed at 40%.

We have a client company with a sole director/shareholder. The Inland Revenue has agreed that the company is not within the IR35 rules.

The company supplies quality assurance services. Currently it has £200 000 in the bank and has no other significant assets or liabilities. The director intends trading for the foreseeable future. In addition to running his own company the director is also a full-time employee of another unconnected company and any dividend from his business will therefore be taxed at 40%.

The company trades from the director's house and has no need to acquire property which might have been done via a small self-administered pension scheme.

The simple question is: how can the director/shareholder access his company's funds with minimal taxation effect?

If you or your firm subscribes to Taxation.co.uk, please click the login box below:

If you are not a subscriber but are a registered user or have a free trial, please enter your details in the following boxes:

Subscribe Now...

Alternatively, you can register free of charge to read a limited amount of subscriber content per month.
Once you have registered, you will receive an email directing you back to read this item in full.

Please reach out to customer services at +44 (0) 330 161 1234 or 'customer.services@lexisnexis.co.uk' for further assistance.

READERS' FORUM premium icon
Read All
Readers’ forum: Impact of voluntary restitution on taxpayers Practice tip: January struggles Readers’ forum: Should we add student loan repayments in disclosure? Readers’ forum: Claiming capital allowances on equipment upgrade Readers’ forum: Is there VAT on furniture insurance?
FIVE WAYS TO MAKE ACCOUNTS PRODUCTION AND TAX EASIER.
Download the exclusive Xero
free report here.

New queries
Please email any questions you might have
to: taxation@lexisnexis.co.uk.

NEWS premium icon
Read All
High level of claim refusal may deter claimants Employers seeking ways to mitigate NI increase Registration: teething problems for private schools Non-doms not deterred by 2017 deemed domicile reforms In brief: 21 November 2024
DEADLINE DATES
CASES premium icon
Read All
Office servicing business is not a trade Retrospective application of apportioning a mixed supply No infringement of human rights Failure to seek time-to-pay arrangement Overturned warrant does not guarantee return of documents
MOST POPULAR
Readers’ forum: Impact of voluntary restitution on taxpayers This week's opinion: 21 November 2024 Office servicing business is not a trade Retrospective application of apportioning a mixed supply No infringement of human rights
Copyright © 2024 LexisNexis
back to top icon