Radio presenter loses IR35 case
The Court of Appeal has dismissed a sports radio presenter’s argument that IR35 didn’t apply to his engagements with TalkSPORT. What’s the full story?
The presenter engaged with TalkSPORT via a limited company. HMRC raised assessments totally £143,000 for income tax and NI, on the basis that the was caught by IR35. The First Tier Tribunal sided with the presenter, but this was overturned at the Upper Tribunal, and now the Court of Appeal has also dismissed his appeal.
The Court found that there was mutuality of obligation because Kickabout Productions Limited required TalkSPORT to offer the presenter airtime for at least 222 days per year. The contract also gave TalkSPORT the right to suspend the presenter, which is consistent with a contract of employment. The Court also confirmed that an absence of workers’ rights in the contract did not carry much weight in determining the employment status because, if there was an employment relationship, he would enjoy the rights conferred by law on employees.
This case again shows us the importance of analysing the details of each specific case before assuming the employment status of a particular engagement.
Related Topics
-
HMRC writes to non-domiciled taxpayers following rule changes
HMRC has begun issuing “one-to-many” letters to individuals affected by recent changes to the tax rules for non-UK domiciled taxpayers. The letters prompt recipients to review their tax position under the new regime. What does this mean if you receive one?
-
Can officers ignore minor input tax errors?
If your business has claimed input tax on an invoice where the supplier has charged VAT incorrectly, HMRC can disallow your claim by issuing an assessment. Can the officer waive that power to achieve a common sense outcome?
-
Practical guide: Tax-efficient will planning with residential property
An individual has a significant property portfolio which provides them with their sole source of income. They want to gift shares in some property to their daughter but retain the income. Can they do this without triggering the reservation of benefit rules?