Taxation logo taxation mission text

Since 1927 the leading authority on tax law, practice and administration

Under an umbrella

16 February 2006 / Kevin Miller
Issue: 4045 / Categories: Comment & Analysis , Arctic Systems , IR35 , Jones v. Garnett , Income Tax
KEVIN MILLER considers the various potential advantages and disadvantages that may arise from the use of a composite company.

THE RECENT DECISION of the Court of Appeal in the Arctic Systems settlement case( Jones v Garnett (re Arctic Systems Ltd) [2005] EWCA Civ 1553) has again focused attention on service companies. While the unanimous decision of the three appeal court judges will have encouraged spouses who operate via a family service company the case is of less comfort to users of another variant of service company — the composite company (composites) also often known as an 'umbrella' company.

This article looks at the background to composites their typical structure and some of the tax and operating issues they face including how the Arctic Systems decision may or may not affect contractors working through composite companies.

Composites — background

Composites are unusual. They bring together strangers as shareholders and employees in a multi-user service company. The worker/shareholders are the only employees. In this article I...

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:

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.

back to top icon