Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Businessman thinks he found a loophole

Roger Trapp
Saturday 20 March 1993 19:02 EST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

HAS Norman Lamont unintentionally created a loophole with his measure to reduce the tax on share dividends? A West Country businessman and his accountant think so.

The businessman says that about half his earnings are paid to him via his limited company. As with many one-man companies, he pays himself a low monthly salary of just over pounds 200, to avoid paying National Insurance. At the end of the year, he pays advance corporation tax at 25 per cent on his profit, and then pays himself the 'forgone salary' as a dividend - with no further tax liability.

Since the Chancellor has announced a reduction in ACT to 20 per cent - and said that ordinary shareholders' dividends will also be taxed at 20 per cent - he believes he will be liable to tax of just 20 per cent on about half his annual salary.

Accountants at leading firms accept the point, but doubt that it is a cause for celebration.

If the business is earning enough to attract higher-rate tax (more than pounds 23,701), the owner will be liable for an extra 20 per cent of tax - the difference between the new ACT rate of 20 per cent and higher-rate income tax - and so will be worse off. If he is a basic-rate taxpayer, the effect is neutral.

While accepting that NICs could be saved this way, they say the owner-manager might be better off paying corporation tax at the small companies (those with profits of less than pounds 250,000) rate of 25 per cent.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in