RYANAIR Police Raid in Germany

[EDDT]

Police Raid in Germany today at 6 bases of Ryanair.
Keywords:

tax fraud
socialsecurity fraud
pseudo self-employment

Scheinselbstständigkeit: Razzia an sechs Ryanair-Standorten | ZEIT ONLINE (http://www.zeit.de/wirtschaft/unternehmen/2016-07/ryanair-razzia-scheinselbststaendigkeit-piloten-staatsanwaltschaft-ermittlungen)

maybe use google translate

[spitfire_sl]

RyanAir Pilot Group Statement:

https://ryanairpilotgroup.com/sites/default/files/press-releases/RPG%20Press%20Release%20-%20Ryanair%20Pilots%20Homes%20Raided%20-%205%20July%202016.pdf

The Ryanair Pilot Group (RPG) can confirm that today (July 5), German tax authorities carried out a number of coordinated raids in at least four Ryanair bases; Cologne, Neiderrhein, Baden-Baden and Berlin SXF. It has also emerged that a number of pilots flying for Ryanair had their homes raided as part of the operation.

[safelife]

Two words for you guys: "Schadenfreude", and "Scheinselbständigkeit".

[Dan_Brown]

Good!! About time these crooks were bought to heel.

[7574ever]

You do realize that "these crooks" have these contracts by necessity, not by choice, and that the actual creators of this scheme do not face any police raids?

Just saying...

[Journey Man]

Good!! About time these crooks were bought to heel.

Do you mean Ryanair or the crews?

[Dan_Brown]

Not the crews, of course not.

Why are their vacancies filled by contract peddling contractors?

Why aren't they employed direct? You know as well as I do it is not to the crews benefit, to be.

[7574ever]

Indeed, I just wonder if it wouldn't make more sense to go after the companies which use these schemes and not the employees.

[ExDubai]

And Ryanair the beneficiary of the contract model is letting the pilots down. Thats their statement:

"Ryanair hat sich mit den deutschen Steuerbehörden getroffen und zugestimmt, diese bezüglich ihrer Nachforschungen zu einigen Vertragspiloten ("Contractor Pilots") zu unterstützen. Die deutschen Steuerbehörden haben bestätigt, dass die Steuerfahndung nicht gegen Ryanair ermittelt. Ryanair verlangt von all seinen Piloten, sowohl solchen, die direkt angestellt sind, als auch von Vertragspiloten, dass sie sich stets entsprechend ihrer steuerlichen Pflichten verhalten. Sollten die deutschen Behörden weitere Unterstützung benötigen, bieten wir diese gerne an."

Short translation:

Ryanair has meet with the german tax authorities and agreed to support them in their investigations against some "contractor pilots" The german tax authorities have confirmed that Ryanair is not accused in this investigations.

Ryanair expect from all their pilots, direct employed or contractors that they pay all their obligated taxes.If the german authorities need more support from Ryanair in that case, Ryanair will support them.

So the pilots, Brookfield Aviation and McGinley Aviation are somehow f....d up and MOL is the Saint.

[7574ever]

Yeah that was my point...

[2close]

The industry is rife with 'contractors'; a good example is 'contract' flight instructors whose only full-time employment is with one ATO and being paid flight pay only (with no basic salary) by ATO's that don't pay them a basic salary as employees.

There is some benefit to the 'contractor' (provided he/she gets enough flying hours) but the biggest gain is by far to the operator.

The problem is, if HMRC (UK) jump down the throats of the ATOs and insist that they are taken on the books as employees with the ensuing NI and pension costs, the cost of flight training will probably have to go up to offset the additional costs to the operator.

There are pros and cons to every argument but personally I would prefer a fixed salary; at least I know how much I will be getting each month and can budget accordingly. Back in the day, at C***** we were paid a basic salary which covered the first 40 hours of instructing and then additional flight pay for hours in excess of 40.

[MrSnuggles]

Oh damn, those poor pilots are screwed!

First RYR demands of them to self employ = first screw.

Then they join the police in busting this first screw = second screw.

I was once told I needed to remove a post or RYR would sue me for defamation. Let's see how long this one appears...

[oliver2002]

RYR and their pilot contracts are a never ending story with the German authorities. Sadly RYR has scheme that is watertight. :(

[ExDubai]

Wait and see, there is a reason why Ryanair payed a high amount to the french authorities. Would be interesting to see what will happen with Brookfield and McGinley. Let's hope that this is only the beginning and the HMRC (UK) will knock on their door soon.....

[llondel]

Ryanair has meet with the german tax authorities and agreed to support them in their investigations against some "contractor pilots"

I wonder if this is a chargeable optional service from Ryanair? How much do they charge the tax people per meeting/visit?

[ExDubai]

I would call it a part of the "scapegoat strategy"

[BRE]

Somewhat off topic, but in the article linkes in the first post, there was a link to another article on how Cargolux exploits its pilots:
Airlines: Ein müder Pilot | ZEIT ONLINE (http://www.zeit.de/2016/26/airlines-burnout-piloten-druck-cargolux).

In that case, it is not about contractor pilots but about driving their pilots through insane rosters, then spying on them if their are on sick leave and then having sick meetings and firing them. Pilots are so scared they don't dare call in sick. I don't want to have a 747C drop on me at some point because the pilot was sick and tired!

The article says that there have been allegations of sick meetings at RYR, too.

The pilots fired by Cargolux are now sueing them in Luxembourg. I wish them luck. Not sure what the legal system there is. According to the article, the health insurance sets what you may do when on sick leave. Their health insurance apparently even limited the times when they could leave their house. Incredible, this is like jail!

In Germany, this is defined by federal law rather than the individual health insurance. If you are on sick leave for back pain, you'd better not be caught laying bricks for your friend. However, you are welcome do to anything you need to keep you going (such as buy food) as long as it won't considerably worsen your illness.

If you are taking antibiotics for sinusitis and cannot fly because of risk of vertigo, as given as an example in the arcticle, in Germany, you may even enjoy the sun or go for a walk or cycle, as this is likely to improve your health.

[Wanabee,Gunnabee,Am]

Personal tax is just that. Personal. The schemes by RYR and others only place the responsibility on the contractor. It is up to the contractor to pay the required contributions. Of course this means if the contractor paid the proper rates they would have less take home pay so many (not all) decide to be selective on how they declare what they earn. Citing expenses against income, dividend payments instead of income tax etc.etc.etc. Been going on for years, even in the UK.

If they prove they have paid everything owed then there will be no come back. If they've been evading tax then they deserve everything they get. I pay mine(UK PAYE) and am sick of subsidising those who think they can get away with it. Now where the German, and other countries, need to target their efforts is in the fact that RYR are not allowing fully employed pilots and thereby avoiding the employers responsibility for their proportion of tax. If the UK that is aboout 11%, so no wonder they try it on.

[what next]

Personal tax is just that. Personal.

This is not so much about taxes, but more about social security payments (healthcare, pension, unemployment). In Germany, these must be paid, at least in part, by the employer. The rules forbid that a self employed "contractor" works full time for a single client (with some rare exceptions, but "airline pilot" is not among these).

What this airline is doing by not employing their pilots directly but contracting them as individual sub-contractors is called "Scheinselbständigkeit" (something like "pretended independence") and this is what the authorities are after. In case the authorities win their case, the airline will have to pay social security for all their pilots in Germany for up to four years retroactive.

[Wanabee,Gunnabee,Am]

In which case the problem lies with RYR. It is they then that should be targetted not the employees. so why are they going after the employees. I shall watch this with interest.

[TRF4EVR]

No one takes the jobs, no problem. Take the job? Pay your taxes.

[ExDubai]

That's something you should explain Brookfield and Ryanair.

[Can737]

No one takes the jobs, no problem. Take the job? Pay your taxes.

Did you even read what was posted above?
Are you part of the MOL disinformation fan group ... :8

This is not so much about taxes, but more about social security payments (healthcare, pension, unemployment). In Germany, these must be paid, at least in part, by the employer. The rules forbid that a self employed "contractor" works full time for a single client (with some rare exceptions, but "airline pilot" is not among these).

What this airline is doing by not employing their pilots directly but contracting them as individual sub-contractors is called "Scheinselbständigkeit" (something like "pretended independence") and this is what the authorities are after. In case the authorities win their case, the airline will have to pay social security for all their pilots in Germany for up to four years retroactive.

[Jwscud]

The "unpaid taxes" in this case are not the pilots dodging things, but the fact that because the state deems BRK/Storm (or with any luck, ultimately Ryanair) to be the employer, these organisations are not providing proper employee benefits such as sick, pay, employers' contributions and it is this they are after.

In my time as a "service provider" I had maybe 5 interactions in total with my "agency" and everything else was entirely through Ryanair. This included changes where Ryanair dealt with and actioned moves and the agency paperwork caught up months later. HMRC are also after Brookfield for similar reasons.

Under UK law, it is BRK who would be liable for any financial penalties were the pilots found to be employees, and anecdotally Brookfield is being wound down, with contracts not renewed but transferred to Storm or Ryanair terms.

I don't know what the situation is in Germany.

[M.Mouse]

If someone takes the job I think you will find that they can only have the job as a freelance contractor. If that is the case the tax rules are different but working for just one company it is known in the UK as false self-employment even if the individual contracts via a third party.

An individual who is forced into self-employment by this situation does pay his or her taxes but the taxation regime, certainly in the UK, is entirely different.

A quick search of the internet will yield many articles on the subject.

[flight_mode]

In Germany the law is very clear. If you declare yourself as self-employed you must operate as a business. The key test authorities apply is to check how many customers the self employed person has served in the last tax year. If the answer is one, you cannot deemed as self employed. The bad news is the offence has been committed by the disguised employee, not the disguised employer. Ryanair, or any other linked company are not on the hook.

You've wilfully declared yourself as self employed in order to gain a financial advantage whilst not actually exhibiting any semblance of a business, which is fraud... It's the harsh reality, I've been through it

When you sign such a service contract, the other party is perfectly aware that you, not them are on the hook for social costs and taxes due, no matter what. The other party rests on the defence that they took all reasonable steps to ensure you were self employed and assumed you would comply with the applicable laws. Its a horrible situation to be in.

[virginblue]

While the focus is on social security contributions, tax issues are also at stake: Because contractors invoice their clients, they are subject to VAT and often have claimed tax breaks in relation to VAT - which they are not allowed to if they are in fact an employee.

For the record, Ryanair has released a press statement that they are not investigated. The problems lies with Brooklands because if there is an employer, it would most probably be Brooklands and not Ryanair (or is Ryanair invoiced for the services by the pilots rather than Brooklands?)

[ExDubai]

@virginblue Sure you could say that they are employees of Brookfield. On the other hand who gives out the roster? To whom do they have to call in case of sickness, who is doing the leave planing.......... It might be that a judge decides hey they are employees of Ryanair.

[thf]

In which case the problem lies with RYR. It is they then that should be targetted not the employees. so why are they going after the employees. I shall watch this with interest.
My experience from similar cases in Germany: They are seeking munition against Ryanair. If the case goes through, Ryanair will have to employ its Germany based pilots as regular employees. Both, employer and employee, will have to pay roughly equally social security (federal pension scheme, unemployment, healthcare and nursing care insurance).

[Metro man]

The pilots can run away a lot easier than the company. Further investigation could uncover wrong doing on the company's part, tip of the iceberg stuff. Remember it was the US tax authorities that got Al Capone, not the police. The German tax office is staffed by people who would have passed the aptitude test for the gestapo with flying colours.

Threats to seize company assets and the possibility of prolonged legal action against an opponent who doesn't need to worry about the cost may cause MOL to reconsider his position.

[CaptainProp]

You do realize that "these crooks" have these contracts by necessity, not by choice, and that the actual creators of this scheme do not face any police raids?


Not correct. If offered contracts that are shady, and possibly putting you in a legal gray area, just don't work for them. Lots of other jobs around.

[DelayReducer]

Are the "self employed" members not made aware of this implication upon commencing work within Germany?

[esa-aardvark]

Something like this happened in my company. We had about 150 people operating various kinds of technical equipment.
They were employed by a certain company, contractor to us,
which had, of course, submitted the lowest bid.
In 1978 or so the German authorities
discovered that no tax or anything else was being paid.
To cut a long story the matter ended up in the German labour
court which decided that we were the employer.
Somewhere in the whole affair the contracting company informed its people that...
"you are not employed by us and never have been".
The "employees" had been a bit silly, mostly sending their money out
of Germany, but via the banking system.
I believe that is was the bank which they all used which informed the authorities.
Europe was of course "Cowboy country" in the early days of the EU. The people employed were mostly from the UK.

[Ancient Observer]

The world of IT is full of these "contractor" behaviours. I've worked in it in the UK, but not Germany.
In the UK, if you can prove that in the contract, it is not for you to do the work, but for you to provide a skilled person to do the work, i.e. that you can substitute someone else who has the required qualifications and skill, and if you can show intent to "sell" your service to some one else, then you can get away with it.
I do not think this applies to Aviation.
So, as and when France, Germany and others catch up with these dodgy employers, and when the Brit politicians focus HMRC on the issue, then something might change...................Some time away, yet.

[Ian W]

The world of IT is full of these "contractor" behaviours. I've worked in it in the UK, but not Germany.
In the UK, if you can prove that in the contract, it is not for you to do the work, but for you to provide a skilled person to do the work, i.e. that you can substitute someone else who has the required qualifications and skill, and if you can show intent to "sell" your service to some one else, then you can get away with it.
I do not think this applies to Aviation.
So, as and when France, Germany and others catch up with these dodgy employers, and when the Brit politicians focus HMRC on the issue, then something might change...................Some time away, yet.

Yes, the hated IR-35.
The tax authorities take a dim view of people setting up as 'personal service companies' to evade (note evade not avoid) tax. Paying themselves a pauper level declared salary and taking the rest in dividends from their company. Or any of a number of similar wheezes, especially those where the 'company' is in another country with laxer tax regimes.
There were a group of 'contractors' working in Europe some years ago who were suddenly told their company was under investigation and then had to pay assessed back taxes back to when they started that employment some up to 5 year's worth of taxes.
It doesn't make sense to get into that position.

[McDoo]

How can Ryanair possibly use the defence the they reasonably believed their pilots were complying with the law? They know that they were not working for anyone else because they hold the legal records of their pilots duty times for FTL recording purposes. Therefore they know that the pilots are not compliant with the requirements for holding self employed/freelance status. ie. the need to work for more than one company.

[er340790]

McDoo is correct. Also tax authorities can take action where the 'substance' of a transaction overrides its 'legal form'. In other words, if the clear intention of the airline is for these pilots to be de-facto employees of Ryanair, then just relying on an agency-employment technicality is no defence.

The sad thing is: any pilot who does not derive flying employment income elsewhere will be on very thin ice in this tax investigation. Usually though, it is the 'deepest-pockets' the tax authorities go after first... i.e. Ryanair in this case. Why chase dozens of individuals who may be unable to repay any tax owed and are highly mobile in their employment anyway, when you can just go after one big fat legal entity?

It will all end in tears. These things usually do. :{

[sky9]

Go after the employee (or self employed contractor) get the facts then go after the employer is my guess.

[Ian W]

McDoo is correct. Also tax authorities can take action where the 'substance' of a transaction overrides its 'legal form'. In other words, if the clear intention of the airline is for these pilots to be de-facto employees of Ryanair, then just relying on an agency-employment technicality is no defence.

The sad thing is: any pilot who does not derive flying employment income elsewhere will be on very thin ice in this tax investigation. Usually though, it is the 'deepest-pockets' the tax authorities go after first... i.e. Ryanair in this case. Why chase dozens of individuals who may be unable to repay any tax owed and are highly mobile in their employment anyway, when you can just go after one big fat legal entity?

It will all end in tears. These things usually do. :{
The tax laws are significantly different in each country. In UK the individual is the one the tax authorities will charge with evasion. In other countries, for example the US, the large company with 'pretend' contractors will be charged with evasion. Presumably, there are countries where both parties are charged.

[Heathrow Harry]

IR-35 is being replaced, or rather enhanced, by the Intermediaries legistlation in the UK

Since last year if you provide more than one person to ANYONE you have to regularly file their details (and payments) including their Tax number with HMRC. Also details of the end user. HMRC will be able to trawl & cross reference all sorts of info to see who is only working fo one company and how little NI & tax they are paying

[Alsacienne]

Not sure what the legal system there is. According to the article, the health insurance sets what you may do when on sick leave. Their health insurance apparently even limited the times when they could leave their house. Incredible, this is like jail!

My apologies if this is thread drift - in which case this post will disappear like snow in summer - but in France, if you are on sick leave, the Sécurité Sociale also imposes rules on when you may leave the house during the working day if you are not going to the doctor or the pharmacie, regardless of which industry you are working in or even if you have no employment at all. The German regulations quoted above do not surprise me in the least!

[zerotohero]

I am an EX BRK guy who voted with his feet.

I started as a Ryanair employee and once I finished my line training I was told I had to resign from Ryanair and sign a BRK contract. I had this for about 5 years then was told I had to set up a limited contract with some random accountant I had never heard of.

Needless to say I started looking right away for a new job and moved as soon as I could have and away from this more than shady employment model.

I don't want to see Ryanair gone as it works for a lot of people and pays a lot of peoples mortgage. But they need to be forced to play the game properly.

[RAT 5]

I started as a Ryanair employee and once I finished my line training I was told I had to resign from Ryanair and sign a BRK contract.

Did you know about that before you started paying out for your type rating? Or did they tell you once you started your line training. In the sim I assume you were not on any contract, but if you were later an employee and then forced to resign that sounds like you, and assume others, would have a claim for wrongful dismissal.

[His dudeness]

Not sure what the legal system there is. According to the article, the health insurance sets what you may do when on sick leave. Their health insurance apparently even limited the times when they could leave their house. Incredible, this is like jail!

Whilst you will regret working, say a push cart, when on sick leave with a bad back (for your employer will use the case to lay you off), all the rest is complete and utter BS.

E.g. I had a sore back few weeks ago and went to the doctor, got a few days sick leave and was told to go swimming and see the physiotherapist. No times given, nor would they be restricted by the insurance or anybody else.

I´m German and pay into the German health system since 1983.

[zerotohero]

RAT 5

Back then it was a case of when you finished your line training you either got a BRK contract or a Ryanair one. I think we were all initially just on a training contract that expired once line checked. I was paid about £1200 a month while training as a PAYE Ryanair employee.

Was all very odd but been early 20's and new to flying I knew no better or different. That was just what was offered when I asked for a job.

I obviously would never put up with that again. I do feel like I was taken advantage of.

[PBY]

I think these days Ryanair contract pilots do not work for BRK or Storm. They are forced by Ryanair to open a limited company in Ireland. Ryanair supplies the contact of lawyers who help to set it up for the pilots. And the company must be in Ireland. There is no other choice. So technically the pilots work for the Irish limited company they have set up. And the corporate tax is around 15%. If you want to withdraw personal income it is another 40%. I do not work for Ryanair. I have only heard that. My info might be wrong. But the Irish limited company is probably the one in trouble. And that is owned by the pilot.

[ATC Watcher]

Very good press release issued by the German pilot Association/Union VC on the issue ( unfortunately for some , only avail in German at the moment ).
Vereinigung Cockpit e.V. : (http://www.vcockpit.de/presse/pressemitteilungen/detailansicht/news/vereinigung-cockpit-vc-zu-hausdurchsuchungen-bei-ryanairpiloten.html)

[golfbananajam]

My understanding of the German press article is (and I bear no responsibility if it's incorrect or slanderous)

House searches of Ryanair pilots
Several searches have been made in recent weeks in Germany of the homes of Ryanair pilots. That these searches have been conducted by the "Finanzkontrolle Scheinselbständigkeit" (FKS), it follows that those legally responsible for the employment model of these pilots, with intermediary employment agencies, amount to bogus self-employment and moonlighting. The Association urges the Ryanair to stop these dodgy business practices immediately and to employ their pilots directly. Price wars may be no longer held on the backs of workers, especially not in such sensitive environments such as air transport.
In Germany, it is estimated that more than 10% of all pilots are unemployed. Companies such as Ryanair, lead in taking advantage of this situation to get pilots in atypical employment relationships. So, a scientific study by the University of Ghent (Vereinigung Cockpit e.V. : Atypical employment (http://www.vcockpit.de/themen-und-positionen/faire-arbeitsbedingungen/atypical-employment.html)) revealed that 16% of all pilots are employed using such dubious methods. A tendency which is rising. Increasingly, pilots are accepted only if they are ready a so called "contractor", without any protection, such as during holiday and illness, and all this after these pilots have paid EUR 30,000 training costs and also commit themselves to pay fine to EUR 5,000, if they leave Ryanair within three months
Since the House searches were conducted by the FKS, it can be assumed that the use of these contracts with intermediary agencies can be regarded as bogus and therefore undeclared work. Markus Wahl, spokesman of the Association cockpit "It seems that Ryanair treats it’s pilots with contempt, having imposed such conditions to now be saying that it is up to pilots to ensure they fulfill any tax liabilities".
The pilots are the weakest link in the chain. The VC calls for Ryanair, in light of the customs focus, to immediately adjust their business practices with dodgy agencies such as Brookfield and McGinley and to directly employ their pilots like all reputable airlines and to establish a social partnership with the respective trade unions under the umbrella of the European Pilot Association ECA.
Martin Locher, Vice President of the Pilots Association (VC) , has said "The VC also calls for Ryanair to introduce standard conditions for their workers, which guarantee a regular basic income in case of illness and prevent practices such as involuntary transfers across Europe. Low cost airlines must also accept unions like all other airlines, and enter into fair negotiations with them. The price wars must no longer be fought on the backs of workers, especially not in security-critical environments such as air transport".

[nicolai]

Perhaps the reason for raiding the employees' homes is to gather evidence of full-time work for a single employer, as well as what they gather from Ryanair.

A corporation might well hide that information at head office, but an individual is more likely to keep it in their house, and a copy of a flying schedule, any payments, etc, will be evidence whether obtained from the pilot or Ryanair. Meanwhile, to try to prove that Ryanair is operating pilots as individual full-time subcontractors working only for Ryanair, the authorities would need to show they had tried to find evidence of this person working for anyone other than Ryanair and had not found it.

So the German authorities might well raid some pilots' houses without being after the pilots, although clearly that doesn't make it any nicer for the pilots.

[silverstrata]

This is rife in the industry, and it is hardly fair to single out the pilots, when they often have little control over these contracts.

One of the worst I saw was a contract from a Belgian company. The contract was with an agent in the UK, and they paid your social taxes. And they were doing so wrongly. But the UK registered contract (which was incongruously in a foreign language), stated that if the angent was caught by the authorities, the pilot had to:

a. Take all the blame.
b. Swear in court that the agent was in the right.
c. Pay all the fines.
d. Pay all the legal fees of the agent.
e. Pay all the legal fees of the airline.

Yes, that is what the contract said. Our induction course was divided - half signed and half walked away. But it is difficult to walk away, when you have a wife and kid to feed, and these agents know this. The response from the agent was: "well, we have a nice contract for you in Nigeria or Congo, if you don't want Brussels...". They also threatened to sue me for breach of contract in walking away, because they thought I had signed - but I had not, I has simply put an 'X' on the contract and sent it back.

And I might add that the contract had no pension, health benefits, holiday entitlement, union representation or employment security. And a third of the salary was paid by cheque from Morocco (in addition to the other tax-evading shenanigans). Such is the state of aviation.


Silver

[ExDubai]

Perhaps the reason for raiding the employees' homes is to gather evidence of full-time work for a single employer, as well as what they gather from Ryanair.

A corporation might well hide that information at head office, but an individual is more likely to keep it in their house, and a copy of a flying schedule, any payments, etc, will be evidence whether obtained from the pilot or Ryanair. Meanwhile, to try to prove that Ryanair is operating pilots as individual full-time subcontractors working only for Ryanair, the authorities would need to show they had tried to find evidence of this person working for anyone other than Ryanair and had not found it.

So the German authorities might well raid some pilots' houses without being after the pilots, although clearly that doesn't make it any nicer for the pilots.
Sure gathering add. evidence against BRK or Ryanair was also a part of the mission. But unfortunate the pilots are also liable and they will get their bill.

[RAT 5]

Sure gathering add. evidence against BRK or Ryanair was also a part of the mission. But unfortunate the pilots are also liable and they will get their bill.

Sure, perhaps: but if they can establish, or it is established for them, that they had been an employee all the time, then they can claim for unpaid holiday pay, unpaid national insurance into the government pension etc. etc and that back claim can cover quite a few years. You can't have one without the other. Unpaid taxes is one thing, bogus self-employment is another. They are 2 quite separate issues and need to be treated differently.
This is the tip of a very sizeable iceberg. Much depends on how deep the authorities want to dive. It would be unjust if they stopped at the vulnerable exposed tip.

[ExDubai]

Sure, perhaps: but if they can establish, or it is established for them, that they had been an employee all the time, then they can claim for unpaid holiday pay, unpaid national insurance into the government pension etc. etc and that back claim can cover quite a few years. You can't have one without the other. Unpaid taxes is one thing, bogus self-employment is another. They are 2 quite separate issues and need to be treated differently.
This is the tip of a very sizeable iceberg. Much depends on how deep the authorities want to dive. It would be unjust if they stopped at the vulnerable exposed tip.

That would be the "killer" and pretty expensive for Ryanair. As I know the german tax authorities, they'll digg very deep into the "****"

[Chronus]

Dan Winterland`s thread "Avoiding Social Security Payments" of 14 April 2016 should be merged with this particular thread. Dan kicked off with a German police raid on a brothel and soon thereafter Brookfield Aviation International Ltd and Ryanair were in the melee.

[India Four Two]

For everyone's convenience:

http://www.pprune.org/terms-endearment/577568-avoiding-social-security-payments.html

As a follower of a current thread on Private Flying, I was amused to read the name of the brothel! :E

[RAT 5]

Don't tell me it was "Red Light Cockpit."

[chuks]

Here in Germany there's a thing called that, "black work." You need the roof repaired, then you get Heinz Hackelschmackel from across town, who happens to work as a roofer. He shows up on the weekend, does the job, gets paid in cash, and vanishes. Same quality work for half the price, so what is not to like?

The kicker is that if Heinz gets caught doing this then you the employer are on the hook for not having paid various taxes, plus he's not insured under the German health-care system for on-the-job injuries. Say he falls off the roof, as sometimes happens .... All hell breaks loose then.

Just a visit from the Arbeitsamt is enough to mean big trouble, when they are even known to swoop upon a gang of navvies, checking if they all are properly employed or not. It's like la migra in the States chasing wetbacks, but done for German citizens working off the books.

So how about using Heinz Hackelschmackel GmbH, which is what Ryanair has been doing? Then the test must be whether Heinz works exclusively for you, or whether he has other customers. If you are his only customer then other tests also might be applied. Do you set his schedule, along with his terms and conditions? Does he present himself to your customers as your employer, wearing your uniform and flying your equipment?

If the guy lives and works in Germany but claims to be self-employed through an agency in Ireland, paying lower Irish taxes while Ryanair pay nothing at all ... I don't see the Germans going along with that loophole. Too, the tax authorities can go back eight years, with the statute of limitations only running from when the tax problem first came to light.

MOL has a certain amount of "pull," since his choosing this or that German airport means increased passenger numbers in a time of austerity. He might get away with only a slap on the wrist if Germany needs Ryanair more than vice-versa. On the other hand, if the pilots can show that a somewhat fake self-employment contract was the only one on offer from Ryanair (as it probably was) then they might be able to escape being totally screwed.

[Hussar 54]

Coincidence that this happens just as DLH are struggling to get their Eurowings / Germanwings / whatever-it's-called-this-week project solidly established ?

I don't think so....

On the other hand, it would be nice to see Mr O'L take one where it hurts most, even though with him its his pockets and not the zip area between them.

[ExDubai]

Coincidence that this happens just as DLH are struggling to get their Eurowings / Germanwings / whatever-it's-called-this-week project solidly established ?

I don't think so....

On the other hand, it would be nice to see Mr O'L take one where it hurts most, even though with him its his pockets and not the zip area between them.
Sure, the evil LH Management is behind this. Poor Saint MoL..... Nice conspiracy theory :}

Those investigations are nothing new, Koblenz public prosecution is chasing BK, Ryanair and Pilots since a couple of years and they are now on the home stretch.

[Hussar 54]

Yeah, I know it might sound a bit far fetched but let's just wait and see....

The FISC in France had a go at both RY and U2 a few years ago and it was all more or less over and done with within a couple of months and they were brought into the tax net - both staff and companies. How deeply into it, I'm not sure, but deep enough to the FISC's satisfaction.

It really shouldn't need a couple of years for the BZSt to achieve the same result unless they were 'reminded' to get on with it....

[MPH]

RYR 'contract' pilots! Hmm, FR ID cards, FR roster, FR uniforms (paid by the pilot), SIM checks by designated FR instructors and on FR forms (IAA)! FR base, not allowed to fly for anyone else but FR and then 'deemed not to be an employee of FR? Who pays BRK, McKinley etc.? FR!

[172_driver]

The FISC in France had a go at both RY and U2 a few years ago and it was all more or less over and done with within a couple of months and they were brought into the tax net - both staff and companies. How deeply into it, I'm not sure, but deep enough to the FISC's satisfaction.

Deep enough for Ryanair to close their French bases. The MRS 'summer base' is the only remaining and still of interest to the police. Or so it was a few summers ago anyway, I don't have the inner gossip anymore.