Brekkie TV host Lorraine Kelly wins IR35 ruling against HMRC, adds fuel to freelance techies' ire over tax reforms

www.theregister.co.uk | 3/21/2019 | Staff
srqlolo (Posted by) Level 3
Click For Photo: https://regmedia.co.uk/2019/03/21/shutterstock_lorraine_kelly.jpg

Obsequious breakfast TV host Lorraine Kelly has become an unlikely champion for the UK's freelance techies battling IR35 legislation after a tribunal ruled she did not owe a £1.2m tax bill – because she was not in fact an ITV employee.

Her Maj's Revenue and Customs (HMRC) reformed the way off-payroll staffs' tax statuses are decided in the public sector from April 2017: when IR35 shifted responsibility for this determination from the employee to the employer. Any contractor caught up in this change is taxed as an employee instead of being liable for corporation tax via their personal service company (PSC).

Kelly - Tax - Bill - Work - ITV

Perma-smiling Kelly was herself in 2016 handed the tax bill for work at ITV Breakfast for the prior four years, as HMRC concluded there had been a direct contract between her and the TV station. It sent her a £899,912.95 income tax bill as well as asking for more than £300,000 in national insurance contributions.

The appeal was heard at the First Tier Tribunal Tax Chamber in Birmingham in November but the ruling was released late yesterday.

Kelly - Morning - Programme - Daybreak - Contract

Kelly, who currently fronts morning programme Daybreak, and who penned a contract with ITV via a business she runs with her husband, described herself in the proceedings as a “self-employed star”.

The pint-sized Scot was not given employee benefits such as holiday, pension entitlement, sick pay or maternity leave and had no job security. And she frequently carried out work, including an expedition to Antartica for a magazine, for rival TV and radio stations and other media outlets.

Judge - Jennifer - Dean - Agreement - Kelly

Judge Jennifer Dean concurred that the agreement Kelly has with ITV was "a contract for services", adding:

"Whilst there is no requirement for a contract of employment to include such features, in our view the absence of them indicates that Ms Kelly was not considered to be or treated as an...
(Excerpt) Read more at: www.theregister.co.uk
Wake Up To Breaking News!
Sign In or Register to comment.

Welcome to Long Room!

Where The World Finds Its News!