View more on these topics

Manual dexterity

Welcome comments on overall remuneration packages appear in HMRC’s updated business income manual.

As many of you will have read recently, HM Revenue & Customs has updated its guidance in the business income manual on relief of employer pension contributions in respect of controlling directors and dependants or close relatives of directors.

For those of you who like official references, it is BIM 46035 that has been updated. This continues to confirm that an employer pension contribution in respect of any director or employee will be an allowable expense unless there is a non-trade purpose for the payment.

It continues to indicate that one circumstance where all or part of a pension contribution may not have been paid wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the trade is where the level of remuneration, including the pension contribution, is excessive for the value of the work undertaken by the individual for the employer.

It goes on to indicate: “On occasion, an employer may make an increased pension contribution on the basis that a scheme is underfunded. It is important when comparing contributions between periods to consider the full facts, including the history of remuneration and contributions, before challenging a deduction based solely on annual comparatives.

“It should be borne in mind that the significant increase in qualifying limits with effect from April 6, 2006 will in itself facilitate and encourage an increase in contributions over earlier periods.”

It is indicated that one way of checking whether the contributions are paid wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the trade is to check whether the overall remuneration package for the controlling director and/or the close friend or relative of the controlling director is comparable with an unconnected employee. Where there is no comparable employee, reference needs to be made to pages BIM47105 and 47106.

BIM 47105 refers to specific deductions in relation to payments to dependants and close relatives of a controlling director. This repeats the comments in BIM 46035 that it is the overall remuneration package, including the pension contribution, that should be assessed and needs to be reasonable if it is to be regarded as wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the trade.

Helpfully, BIM 47106 indicates that “controlling directors are often the driving force behind the company. Where the controlling director is also the person whose work generates the company’s income, then the level of the remuneration package is a commercial decision and it is unlikely that there will be a non-business purpose for the level of the remuneration package. It should be noted that remuneration does not include entitlement to dividends, etc, arising in the capacity of shareholder”.

This could be important, given the strong continuing financial reasons for taking a dividend instead of a salary to generate significant National Insurance savings and thus diminish the “loss to the authorities” suffered on withdrawing sums from an owner-managed business.

When considering what action should be taken regarding an excessive remuneration package for a director or an employee who is a close relative or friend of a controlling director, BIM 47106 indicates: “If the amounts involved and the facts established indicate that a remuneration package is demonstrably in excess of what is commercially reasonable, then there may be other avenues to consider in addition to the question of whether an element of the payment is other than wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the trade. In particular, it may also be appropriate to consider whether the settlements legislation might apply or if payment is in fact part of the controlling director’s remuneration or the proprietor’s drawings rather than the market rate remuneration of the relative/friend employee.”

If a payment or part of a payment to a relative or close friend of a director appears not to form part of their remuneration, to the extent to which it appears to exceed what is reasonably commercial, then HMRC argues that it may actually be part of the director’s own remuneration. Therefore, although the payment may be wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the trade, it will in the following circumstances be taxable on the director rather than the employee if:

– The spouse or close relative is simply acting as a conduit for the director, in which case it may be taxable as earnings of the director, or
– The payment is made to a relative or a member of the director’s family or household, in which case it may be taxable on the director under the benefits’ legislation.

The comments made by HMRC concerning the general relief on employer pension contributions in respect of a controlling director are to be welcomed.

However, advisers may still need to proceed with some caution in highcontribution cases or cases where there is insufficient current profit to support the contribution.

The reference to the consideration of the overall remuneration package, including the pension contribution, is especially welcome and appears to recognise that many owners will vary the constituents of the overall remuneration package from year to year between salary, bonus, dividends and pension contributions to suit the circumstances at the time.


Second opinion in the Dr Phizackerley case

Many national newspapers picked up on the recent special commissioner’s decision in the Phizackerley case but we believe some conclusions reached may be misleading.

Skandia chief in misselling alert over property in wrap

Skandia UK business unit chief executive Brett Williams believes platforms including residential property holdings within their portfolio valuations could encourage misselling.Williams says putting houses on to a platform and taking 0.5-1 per cent commission on the value of the property could be construed as a missale because they do not advise on anything to justify […]

Baring calls for shift to fully funded schemes

Baring Asset Management is proposing the creation of a fully funded public sector pensions system to cover civil servants, the NHS, teachers and the armed forces.It would be based on successful schemes such as the Dutch public sector workers’ scheme ABP and the California public employees scheme Calpers.Barings director of fixed income Toby Nangle believes […]

LibDems accuse Government of personal account “sell out”

The LibDems have attacked the Government’s decision to cut the personal account contribution cap to £3,600 accusing it of “selling out” to the industry.Despite the general support that has greeted the Government’s change of heart, LibDem Shadow Work and Pensions Secretary David laws says the move risks putting the interests of providers before savers.Laws says: […]


News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up


    Leave a comment


    Why register with Money Marketing ?

    Providing trusted insight for professional advisers.  Since 1985 Money Marketing has helped promote and analyse the financial adviser community in the UK and continues to be the trusted industry brand for independent insight and advice.

    News & analysis delivered directly to your inbox
    Register today to receive our range of news alerts including daily and weekly briefings

    Money Marketing Events
    Be the first to hear about our industry leading conferences, awards, roundtables and more.

    Research and insight
    Take part in and see the results of Money Marketing's flagship investigations into industry trends.

    Have your say
    Only registered users can post comments. As the voice of the adviser community, our content generates robust debate. Sign up today and make your voice heard.

    Register now

    Having problems?

    Contact us on +44 (0)20 7292 3712

    Lines are open Monday to Friday 9:00am -5.00pm