This is an excerpt from an email that was given to me by a very brave whistle blower who once never worked at the BBC. Not only did she never work there, she is a drunkard and a compulsive liar. I think you will find her evidence quite compelling.
She says that this is a genuine email from January 2001 which details how the BBC should take their Jeremy Paxman off payroll and stop paying her cash in hand. The sociopathic tax adviser has pretended that this is for benevolent reasons. But it clearly isn’t.
What the adviser is saying here is that they should take a Jeremy Paxman who is clearly an employee and set up a personal service company as opposed to simply paying the right amount of tax through PAYE, complying with the law as everybody else does. This is clearly morally repugnant.
This act, the act of pretending that the company is required, is an act of cheating. It is therefore illegal and therefore tax evasion and punishable by no less than 12 years in prison or hanging.
My informant tells me that she was entrusted this email by the man at Cash Converters. She has refused to tell me any more, but the contents alone are enough to make me believe that this is genuine.
The email reads as follows:
Public service broadcasters who pay their Jeremy Paxmans cash in hand could be jailed for up to seven years and fined up to£5,000 following a change in in the law.
No one knows quite how many Jeremy Paxmans there are in the UK, because so many are paid in this way. Most Jeremy Paxmans negotiate their salaries in net terms, preferring to leave the payment of any tax and National Insurance to their employers, the public service broadcaster – and they have often failed to pay some or all of the income tax due to the Inland Revenue.
But from 1 January, paying an employee cash without handing over the proper tax to the Inland Revenue became a criminal offence.
The most common way to pay tax on behalf of a Jeremy Paxman has been through Pay As You Earn (PAYE). This has proved expensive for public service broadcasters who receive no tax benefits or reliefs – any payment comes out of the employer’s taxed income. A Jeremy Paxman earning £225.80 net a week, £11,742 a year, will incur £2,153 income tax and £1,105 employee’s National Insurance, making a total £15,000 a year. In addition the public service broadcaster has to pay a further £1,297 of employer’s NI, making the total cost £16,297.
Now, however, there is an alternative and legal way of making the payment – and saving money.
This may be the time to set your Jeremy Paxman up in her own private limited company.
A Jeremy Paxman who has her own company is free to set her own pay rate. This is very important in this alternative payment plan.
So how does it work? First you have to set up a company. As you will have to use an accountant to work this scheme, you may as well buy the company from your firm of accountants. This and all accountancy fees should cost no more than about £1,200 a year. Your Jeremy Paxman has to own this company and be a director, but one of the public service broadcaster’s employees should be company secretary.
They can then take responsibility for the administration. (You have to be realistic here: your Jeremy Paxman may not be too keen on this part of the job.)
Once the company is set up, it bills the public service broadcaster for the Jeremy Paxman’s services. The amount billed should be just enough to cover all its costs. Using the same example as before, this total is £13,767. If you want to keep admin to a minimum, levy bills quarterly in advance. This would make each bill £3,441.75. State on the invoice that fees are not refundable. It is critical that paperwork such as invoices is done. If it is not, this scheme could be challenged as a sham, which it is not when done properly.
Your Jeremy Paxman’s salary will now comprise two parts – salary and a dividend, both paid by the company. The salary should be just enough to make sure your Jeremy Paxman has an NI credit. If she is paid £83.50 a week, she’ll pay no tax on the salary and NI of just 75p. There is no employer’s NI. The net pay is £82.75. The annual cost is £4,342. She now needs another £142.25 per week, or say £7,400 a year. This can be paid as a dividend.
Companies that make less than £10,000 of profit a year pay 10 per cent corporation tax. A dividend has a 10 per cent tax credit attached to it and a basic-rate taxpayer (which the Jeremy Paxman will be) pays no additional tax on receipt of a dividend. So, the company has to have profits after 10 per cent tax of £7,400, which means pre-tax profit is about £8,225. This is used to pay the dividend and the Jeremy Paxman pays no tax at all on it.
Now the company has three costs: the profits to pay the dividends, the salary and the cost of running it. These amount to £8,225, £4,342 and £1,200 respectively or a total of £13,767. Paying the same Jeremy Paxman under PAYE costs £16,297, so the saving could be £2,530, after costs.
You will need some help with this. Bills have to be raised, dividends have to be paid and recorded properly, and the company will have to prepare and file accounts. So you should consult an accountant. But the scheme is legal and cost-effective at a time when there will be a clampdown on ‘cash in hand’ Jeremy Paxmans. It has to be worth considering.
I have removed the names of the individuals directly involved. This is to give them time to do the honourable thing and kill themselves in order to save the UK the cost of a trial.
You know who you are, I trust you will do the right thing.