Ryanair, Brookfield and Tax
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ryanair, Brookfield and Tax
I know there is loads written about this and I dont work for Ryanair in any way, directly or via Brookfield.
I do however have a friend who works for Ryanair as a contractor with Brookfield and he tells me he is now going to have to start paying tax with PAYE.
Without getting into a mud slinging competition about FR, can someone please explain how or why a contractor should be forced to pay PAYE and if they are, does that mean they are then a full-time employee with Brookfield and are therefore entitled to benefits afforded to full time employees, ie. leave, paid sick time, social security employer contributions, a contract etc etc, basically, the things we all take for granted when in full time employment.
Thanks, changed Parc to Brookfield, apologies.
I do however have a friend who works for Ryanair as a contractor with Brookfield and he tells me he is now going to have to start paying tax with PAYE.
Without getting into a mud slinging competition about FR, can someone please explain how or why a contractor should be forced to pay PAYE and if they are, does that mean they are then a full-time employee with Brookfield and are therefore entitled to benefits afforded to full time employees, ie. leave, paid sick time, social security employer contributions, a contract etc etc, basically, the things we all take for granted when in full time employment.
Thanks, changed Parc to Brookfield, apologies.
Last edited by south coast; 23rd Nov 2009 at 13:23.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: U K
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you mean Brookfield and not Parc.
As I understand it, the new contract has contractors tied to one of three accountants that take off 30% at source from their monthly pay in order to send this to the revenue. I assume this is to make people pay their taxes and reduce the exposure of the company becoming liable in the event of non payment.
As I understand it, the new contract has contractors tied to one of three accountants that take off 30% at source from their monthly pay in order to send this to the revenue. I assume this is to make people pay their taxes and reduce the exposure of the company becoming liable in the event of non payment.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: U K
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
3% is the accountants charge for his services, I understand they are also to take 30% off the top for the tax man. You then get:- 100% less 33%, i.e 67%.
You then sort out the ballance with the revenue at the end of the year!
You then sort out the ballance with the revenue at the end of the year!
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: some hotel
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
3%
Let me get this straight, not trying to throw mud around now but just interested; 3% of a pilot's pay flows into the contracter's pocket just for paying a big chunk of tax up front to the taxman, yet the employee is still to work out the fine math at year's end?
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: London
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I cannot accuse the posters above of being wrong, but some of the language is perhaps a little misleading.
From the gross income made by the contractors (pilots) limited company, you deduct any normal and approved expenses incurred. From the balance you pay income tax at the appropriate rate for your earnings (basically PAYE). The difference between my way of putting it, and posts above, is that it is not a "blanket" 30% (or any other percentage), but is calculated on income as is the case for any other Irish tax payer.
Wally.
From the gross income made by the contractors (pilots) limited company, you deduct any normal and approved expenses incurred. From the balance you pay income tax at the appropriate rate for your earnings (basically PAYE). The difference between my way of putting it, and posts above, is that it is not a "blanket" 30% (or any other percentage), but is calculated on income as is the case for any other Irish tax payer.
Wally.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: U K
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wally, Thanks for the clarification, I understood it was something like that. It does make a big difference to just picking up 7 or 8000 euro's a month and sorting thing's out sometime in the future. It will also make a massive difference to some of the captains on 15000 euro's a month that aren't even paying any tax just now, once they have to switch to new contract.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Ireland
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the deal is as follows.
Any of the four approved accountants charge 3% of fees or turnover for providing the service irrespective of the outcome. The tax liability is dependent on the pilots situation and on the accountants skillset. As you see from previous piostings I use Scanlon & Associates. They are light years ahead of the other firms and this is reflected in their popularity.
Any of the four approved accountants charge 3% of fees or turnover for providing the service irrespective of the outcome. The tax liability is dependent on the pilots situation and on the accountants skillset. As you see from previous piostings I use Scanlon & Associates. They are light years ahead of the other firms and this is reflected in their popularity.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dutch pilots, of whom there are many at both EZ & FR can deduct all training costs against income tax. Thus they are tax free for quite a few years. If it's normal on the Continent why not else where?
A question: how can you be self employed and pay PAYE? That seems a contradiction. If someone is paying you net, rostering you as and when they wish, controlling all you do and say, and how, then how on earth can you be 'self-employed'? I know this has been discussed before, but now this madatory Irish solicitor set-up has been constructed it makes it even more smelly. You are self employed, paid via a UK agency, but you MUST club together with an Irish solicitor to form an Irish company, pay Irish taxes while you are based in Italy or anywhere else, and never visit Ireland and have no income there. This sounds like the most shackled, inhibited, self-empolyment scenario I've ever heard of.
A question: how can you be self employed and pay PAYE? That seems a contradiction. If someone is paying you net, rostering you as and when they wish, controlling all you do and say, and how, then how on earth can you be 'self-employed'? I know this has been discussed before, but now this madatory Irish solicitor set-up has been constructed it makes it even more smelly. You are self employed, paid via a UK agency, but you MUST club together with an Irish solicitor to form an Irish company, pay Irish taxes while you are based in Italy or anywhere else, and never visit Ireland and have no income there. This sounds like the most shackled, inhibited, self-empolyment scenario I've ever heard of.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: China
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are three accountants, BRK have told them that they must charge 3%, there are alternatives for half this amount and pilots are getting paid and are still on the roster.
Its PAYE because the pilot is not self employed but instead is employed by an Irish Company, (all be it one that he owns himself)
Its been gone over a hundred times here that the scenario has been manufactured by FR & BRK to suit themselves. A chunk of full time pilots to cover the basics and then a few hundred contractors who can be taken off the roster at no cost to the airline when demand for flights is lower.
Its a good business model and if the pilots were free to use their own accountants would probably suit all those pilots flying for FR that do not live in Ireland and they could reduce their taxes with some decent tax advice.
However because BRK only care about BRK and not keeping their contractors happy. There see no incentive for them to help the pilots take home more pay.
Ironically they are missing a trick here. By allowing pilots to use more aggressive tax planning strategies they could keep the Irish tax office happy and at the same time have a happy bunch of contractors who are all taking home significantly more money that their full time employee colleagues.
Its PAYE because the pilot is not self employed but instead is employed by an Irish Company, (all be it one that he owns himself)
Its been gone over a hundred times here that the scenario has been manufactured by FR & BRK to suit themselves. A chunk of full time pilots to cover the basics and then a few hundred contractors who can be taken off the roster at no cost to the airline when demand for flights is lower.
Its a good business model and if the pilots were free to use their own accountants would probably suit all those pilots flying for FR that do not live in Ireland and they could reduce their taxes with some decent tax advice.
However because BRK only care about BRK and not keeping their contractors happy. There see no incentive for them to help the pilots take home more pay.
Ironically they are missing a trick here. By allowing pilots to use more aggressive tax planning strategies they could keep the Irish tax office happy and at the same time have a happy bunch of contractors who are all taking home significantly more money that their full time employee colleagues.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: London
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FLYBOY1818,
As a joiner earlier this, and as someone who was forced to select 1 of the 3 accountants requested by BRK, I can tell you first hand that all type rating costs are being reclaimed as expenses against un-taxed income. What we cannot claim is previous training ATPL/CAA costs.
Wally.
As a joiner earlier this, and as someone who was forced to select 1 of the 3 accountants requested by BRK, I can tell you first hand that all type rating costs are being reclaimed as expenses against un-taxed income. What we cannot claim is previous training ATPL/CAA costs.
Wally.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: London
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I need to be careful in my use of language to ensure I do not mis-lead you here.
The tax rules allow us to do two things. Firstly, we reclaim the VAT payment, which means that part of the payment comes back to us and goes straight back into our pocket.
For the remainder (28ish K EUR), we are entitled to claim this back as an expense. This means, in simple terms, that the first 28k of our income is tax free. We have still paid this money out, but the rules mean we pay less tax on our initial income.
Wally.
The tax rules allow us to do two things. Firstly, we reclaim the VAT payment, which means that part of the payment comes back to us and goes straight back into our pocket.
For the remainder (28ish K EUR), we are entitled to claim this back as an expense. This means, in simple terms, that the first 28k of our income is tax free. We have still paid this money out, but the rules mean we pay less tax on our initial income.
Wally.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: China
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wally
I thought Type rating and training are specifically named as expenses that the Irish Revenue will not allow a company to claim.
I think it was an issue for Aer Lingus a few years back and I know that Aer Arrann also sent a query to the tax office in the last 18 months.
I thought Type rating and training are specifically named as expenses that the Irish Revenue will not allow a company to claim.
I think it was an issue for Aer Lingus a few years back and I know that Aer Arrann also sent a query to the tax office in the last 18 months.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: One hump; two if you're pretty.
Posts: 293
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Where's the rat poison when you really need it?
This sounds like the most shackled, inhibited, self-empolyment scenario I've ever heard of.
Dutch pilots, of whom there are many at both EZ & FR
Leo.
