{"id":223,"date":"2014-02-10T11:34:30","date_gmt":"2014-02-10T11:34:30","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/peterrayney.co.uk\/?p=223"},"modified":"2015-11-18T15:31:01","modified_gmt":"2015-11-18T15:31:01","slug":"salaried-llp-members-youre-just-an-employee-in-disguise","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/peterrayney.co.uk\/blog\/2014\/02\/10\/salaried-llp-members-youre-just-an-employee-in-disguise\/","title":{"rendered":"SALARIED LLP MEMBERS \u2013 \u201cYOU\u2019RE JUST AN EMPLOYEE IN DISGUISE\u201d"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Under the current tax rules, all members of an LLP are automatically treated as self-employed for tax purposes, including those who only take substantially \u2018fixed salary\u2019.\u00a0 This means that they pay tax on their LLP profit share through the self-assessment system and do not suffer tax\/NIC under PAYE. Similarly, the 13.8% employers\u2019 NIC cost is avoided.<\/p>\n<p>HMRC now consider that this treatment has been far too generous since, in substance, the status of many fixed salaried partners is more akin to acting as an employee.\u00a0 Thus, from 6 April 2014, specific new legislation will apply to treat the majority of \u2018salaried\u2019 partners as having an \u2018employee\u2019 status for tax purposes.<\/p>\n<p>These rules apply to any LLP partner where <em><strong>all<\/strong><\/em> the following three conditions are satisfied:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><i style=\"color: #000000;\">Condition A<\/i> \u2013 The partner\u2019s reward is wholly or substantially (taking to mean 80% or more) a \u2018disguised salary\u2019 \u2013 i.e. remuneration that is fixed or is variable by reference to <i style=\"color: #000000;\">individual performance<\/i> targets.\u00a0 A profit share that varies by reference to the firm\u2019s profits as a whole would not be treated as part of a \u2018disguised salary\u2019 arrangement.<\/li>\n<li><i>Condition B<\/i> \u2013 The partner does not have significant influence over the LLP\u2019s business.\u00a0 There is no definition of what a \u2018significant influence\u2019 means, which creates a great deal of uncertainty with the application of this test.<\/li>\n<li><i>Condition C<\/i> \u2013 Less than 25% of the partner\u2019s expected \u2018disguised salary\u2019 for the relevant tax year is contributed as capital.\u00a0 This condition has to be reconsidered any time there is a change in the partner\u2019s capital contribution or other change in circumstances.\u00a0 Given this is a reasonably objective test, firms should be able to take their vulnerable \u2018fixed share\u2019 partners outside these rules by increasing their capital contribution requirement.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Where partners fall within the \u2018disguised salary\u2019 rules for LLPs, their earnings will be subject to PAYE and employees\u2019\/employer\u2019s NICs.\u00a0 Furthermore, they will also be within the ambit of the employment-related securities and disguised remuneration legislation.<\/p>\n<p>Partners in an ordinary partnership (as opposed to an LLP) are not caught by the \u2018disguised salary\u2019 regime. The question of whether they are acting as genuine partners or working as employees will still be decided on the precise facts of each case.<\/p>\n<p>Peter Rayney<br \/>\n11 February 2014<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Under the current tax rules, all members of an LLP are automatically treated as self-employed for tax purposes, including those who only take substantially \u2018fixed salary\u2019.\u00a0 This means that they pay tax on their LLP profit share through the self-assessment &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/peterrayney.co.uk\/blog\/2014\/02\/10\/salaried-llp-members-youre-just-an-employee-in-disguise\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[3],"tags":[74,77,76],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/peterrayney.co.uk\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/223"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/peterrayney.co.uk\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/peterrayney.co.uk\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/peterrayney.co.uk\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/peterrayney.co.uk\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=223"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/peterrayney.co.uk\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/223\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":224,"href":"https:\/\/peterrayney.co.uk\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/223\/revisions\/224"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/peterrayney.co.uk\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=223"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/peterrayney.co.uk\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=223"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/peterrayney.co.uk\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=223"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}