Italian tax authority after Ryanair pilots
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: I wish I knew
Posts: 624
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
UK and Hong Kong authorities " go after" CX pilots, Belgium authority " goes after " Tui Pilots" Italian authority "after Ryanair pilots".. has anyone who has actually been contacted by any authority got any contribution? It would appear many of these "rumours" are speculation!
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Dg800
Once again, this has nothing to do with contractors but only with employees. If you live in one country but have your income taxed at source in another country it may well be that you also have obligations to fulfill (such as reporting all your combined earnings) towards the country of residence. These obligations are your responsibility only, your employer will not do that for you, because you are not like a "normal" employee who works, lives and pays his taxes in one and the same country.
Are you, as a resident in Italy, obliged to pay income tax in Italy when you are employed by an Irish airline? Would the tax the company deducts at source and pays to Ireland be deducted and if the Italian tax level is higher, would you have to pay the difference to Italian authorities?
If you were based in Sweden, that would be the case, so how about Italy?
Rumours a few years ago said there was a loop-hole in the taxation agreement between Ireland and Italy. Appearently it said that if you:
-Were not an Italian national
-Were employed by a foreign carrier
-Based in Italy
You could choose to pay tax either in the country of the company, or in Italy.
As a Ryanair employee you had therefore the opportunity to pay your taxes in Ireland and not in Italy. But, as you were a resident of Italy and did not use any public resources funded by income tax in Ireland for the full year, you had an opportunity to have all tax payed to Ireland refunded at the end of there year. Hence, the income tax would drop to zero. If this was fully legal, I couldn't say, but it was ongoing on the Italian bases a few years back. The agreement was supposed to be changed a couple of years ago but I don't know what has happended...
Those that used above mentioned loop-hole might have "forgotten" to adapt to new regulations and would not have declared their income tha last couple of years which could lead to a nasty surprise...
Originally Posted by A and C
Dannyagilla and I have clashed a few times on this forum and I have to ask what he makes of the situation in Spain and pilots who are trying to pay rather than avoid taxes.
Over the last few weeks a number of pilots from the Northern part of Europe have been told that they have to register & Pay social tax in Spain were they are based. They have turned up at the Police station to register them selfs as resident but the Police won't stamp their tax forms because the Police don't consider them resident.
So now we have a situation were the pilots are trying to comply with the EU regulations regarding social tax but the National authority's are refusing to issue the paperwork to enable the tax to be paid.
Just to add to the confusion one country up north is refusing to let these people pay the social tax were they are really resident because the EU directive requires the tax to be paid in the country that the pilot is based in !
So now these guys can't pay the Social tax to any one.
You could not write this as fiction, it's just too stupid !
Over the last few weeks a number of pilots from the Northern part of Europe have been told that they have to register & Pay social tax in Spain were they are based. They have turned up at the Police station to register them selfs as resident but the Police won't stamp their tax forms because the Police don't consider them resident.
So now we have a situation were the pilots are trying to comply with the EU regulations regarding social tax but the National authority's are refusing to issue the paperwork to enable the tax to be paid.
Just to add to the confusion one country up north is refusing to let these people pay the social tax were they are really resident because the EU directive requires the tax to be paid in the country that the pilot is based in !
So now these guys can't pay the Social tax to any one.
You could not write this as fiction, it's just too stupid !
I agree the regulations were stressed through by thebureaucrats and the consequences of the regulations were most likely not analyzed enough.
Though, the need for these regulations are created by certain companies constant search to avoid competeing with local terms and regulation.
Now, these Nordic nationals based in Spain are by law probably not considered residents. Your place of residence is more or less globally defined as the place where you usually spend your free time and nightrest. The Nordic pilots based in Spain in above mentioned company spend their nights on duty in hotels all over the Nordic region, commute back to the Nordic countries on their days off and might on the odd occasion spend a night or so in Spain in between commuting and work. Therefore, they can't be considered residents of Spain.
This should, however, not be a problem since their employer are responsible for paying social security according to EU law.
The residency issue is only a matter of where you are liable to pay income tax. Normally you pay income tax to the country where you are employed. If employed in Holland, based in Spain and residing in Sweden you would probably be liable to pay income tax in Holland and Sweden.
Last edited by linmar; 12th Jan 2013 at 11:14.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Linear
We're as I know that some of the social tax is the employers responsibility, in the UK the employee has to pay part of this ( known as as National Insurance ).
My post was intended to illustrate that some pilots who want to comply with the legislation in the area are being prevented from doing so by the authorities who it would seem can't get their act together.
The EU publishes these mandates and the EU states interpret them and them into national legislation bit the legislation fails to join up across the EU and its in those gaps that Ryanair is operating.
Mr O'leary is just operating in the gaps in the EU legislation and is legal to do so and so as much as the Italians might not like it he can go on until the EU gets its act together ( don't hold your breath it seams it is only the UK that has copped on to the corrupt, self congratulating, self perpetuation and utterly ineffective bean feast that Brussels has become)
My post was intended to illustrate that some pilots who want to comply with the legislation in the area are being prevented from doing so by the authorities who it would seem can't get their act together.
The EU publishes these mandates and the EU states interpret them and them into national legislation bit the legislation fails to join up across the EU and its in those gaps that Ryanair is operating.
Mr O'leary is just operating in the gaps in the EU legislation and is legal to do so and so as much as the Italians might not like it he can go on until the EU gets its act together ( don't hold your breath it seams it is only the UK that has copped on to the corrupt, self congratulating, self perpetuation and utterly ineffective bean feast that Brussels has become)
Last edited by A and C; 13th Jan 2013 at 08:46.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Lost in Space
Posts: 325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agencies required the contractor to be a Limited Company so they or the airline would not be responsible for any tax liability, when I worked for FR all the contractors I spoke to all boasted that they didn't pay tax, happy to use the roads and other services in the UK that the hard working British tax payer has paid for, hope the tax authorities get the back tax owed.
Psychophysiological entity
Serious stuff this. Many years ago I had to travel the width of the UK to do my job flying and training crews in Cardiff. I claimed to be self employed and set all kind of costs against my income. Car and accommodation were of course the main items. I got a huge tax bill.
I went to what must have been the heavy end of a tribunal. A magistrate, a QC and two top tax bods. I went in alone.
This just was being employed to do a job for one employer over a year obliged me to be properly employed on a PAYE basis.
I protested long and loud for about an hour, citing all kinds of business done by one man bands. At the very least it would have opened up a huge can of worms and while waiting outside, one of the tax bods said, 'I think you've got this one.' I asked him if they'd appeal. He said no.
When I went in, the QC and magistrate had decided I could keep my money. It was a huge Phew! moment.
Later the law changed and who knows, it might well have been my argument that prompted it.
I was told by local tradesmen that one had to work for at least three employer/clients in the tax year to be considered for self-employed status. I never put it to the test, but what I did do was start a Limited Liability company in another trade. I also flew freelance 3 days a week.
I hired a respected accountant and he did everything. Really earned his keep.
Now, new dangers.
Just being one of the two (then a minimum number) directors left you open to 178 criminal laws. It is not a free lunch--despite how many free lunches you get.
It worked quite well for us, but there was a huge amount of paperwork involved with tax and VAT alone, and every invoice and slip of paper was a legal document, with all that implies.
Take care and keep a fat tax fund healthy and locked away from temptation.
I went to what must have been the heavy end of a tribunal. A magistrate, a QC and two top tax bods. I went in alone.
This just was being employed to do a job for one employer over a year obliged me to be properly employed on a PAYE basis.
I protested long and loud for about an hour, citing all kinds of business done by one man bands. At the very least it would have opened up a huge can of worms and while waiting outside, one of the tax bods said, 'I think you've got this one.' I asked him if they'd appeal. He said no.
When I went in, the QC and magistrate had decided I could keep my money. It was a huge Phew! moment.
Later the law changed and who knows, it might well have been my argument that prompted it.
I was told by local tradesmen that one had to work for at least three employer/clients in the tax year to be considered for self-employed status. I never put it to the test, but what I did do was start a Limited Liability company in another trade. I also flew freelance 3 days a week.
I hired a respected accountant and he did everything. Really earned his keep.
Now, new dangers.
Just being one of the two (then a minimum number) directors left you open to 178 criminal laws. It is not a free lunch--despite how many free lunches you get.
It worked quite well for us, but there was a huge amount of paperwork involved with tax and VAT alone, and every invoice and slip of paper was a legal document, with all that implies.
Take care and keep a fat tax fund healthy and locked away from temptation.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the UK IR35 is a can of worms - there is no real specific determination of what makes you self -employed - just a balance of probabilities
You should err on the safe side of
1. having multiple employers over a two year period
2. providing your own kit and training
3. not having an office or email or business cards from the employing company
4. having the "right of substitution" i.e you can send someone in your place
5. Determining what hours you work and where and when
6. having your own office and website
7. Not having a roll-over provision in the contract
8. Having a drop date in your contract and make that less than 12 months
9. not attending company functions
Even if you do all of the above you are not completely safe but it makes you a tougher target compared to others...........
You should err on the safe side of
1. having multiple employers over a two year period
2. providing your own kit and training
3. not having an office or email or business cards from the employing company
4. having the "right of substitution" i.e you can send someone in your place
5. Determining what hours you work and where and when
6. having your own office and website
7. Not having a roll-over provision in the contract
8. Having a drop date in your contract and make that less than 12 months
9. not attending company functions
Even if you do all of the above you are not completely safe but it makes you a tougher target compared to others...........
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by A and C
We're as I know that some of the social tax is the employers responsibility, in the UK the employee has to pay part of this ( known as as National Insurance ).
My post was intended to illustrate that some pilots who want to comply with the legislation in the area are being prevented from doing so by the authorities who it would seem can't get their act together.
The EU publishes these mandates and the EU states interpret them and them into national legislation bit the legislation fails to join up across the EU and its in those gaps that Ryanair is operating.
Mr O'leary is just operating in the gaps in the EU legislation and is legal to do so and so as much as the Italians might not like it he can go on until the EU gets its act together ( don't hold your breath it seams it is only the UK that has copped on to the corrupt, self congratulating, self perpetuation and utterly ineffective bean feast that Brussels has become)
My post was intended to illustrate that some pilots who want to comply with the legislation in the area are being prevented from doing so by the authorities who it would seem can't get their act together.
The EU publishes these mandates and the EU states interpret them and them into national legislation bit the legislation fails to join up across the EU and its in those gaps that Ryanair is operating.
Mr O'leary is just operating in the gaps in the EU legislation and is legal to do so and so as much as the Italians might not like it he can go on until the EU gets its act together ( don't hold your breath it seams it is only the UK that has copped on to the corrupt, self congratulating, self perpetuation and utterly ineffective bean feast that Brussels has become)
The residency issue shouldn't be a problem however, if Spanish authorities got their act together. Much like Italy, Greece and a couple of others the internal revenue administration could have a lot to learn from certain countries farther north in terms of, relatively, effectively at least collecting and making sure different taxes are payed. I believe the Swedish "IRS" actually sent "experts" to Greece in this matter...
I fully agree with you regarding EU legislation and the interpretation of different states. As long as the EU-states are not bound together by joint fiscal systems it will continue to be a complete failure, not saying that I would like full integration...
Though, drifting slightly off topic here, can anyone confirm the above mentioned regarding Italian - Irish tax agreements and the potential tax-dodging involved?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: monaco
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An article appearing in the italian news 2 days ago wth a google translation below.
Sorry A&C but t looks like MOL isn't in the lead anymore....
Il passo indietro di mr. Ryanair - Corriere Bergamo
Michael O'Leary
From 1 January 2013 Ryanair is registered at the Chamber of Commerce of Milan. This is the final step in a process of regularization of the low cost airline world's most powerful (who now pay tuition and fees in Italy), sealed by the statements of Wednesday's patron Michael O 'Leary: "If Italy changes the law, we respect. In any base we operate, we respect the rules and do it in Italy. For this also solve the disputes. " It is worth remembering that the disputes referred to Mister Ryanair originated in the question rather well founded, that in the past the giant of the skies has considered its employees from time to time Irish or Italian depending on your convenience. Rather than comply with the law, according to legal fronts open, Ryanair would be adequate for years two rules (perhaps not coincidentally O'Leary used the plural) to Dublin, when it came to pay less taxes and contributions, and that of Rome, when he is tacitly allowed its employees usufruissero of our health care, though not right.
The shyster turns from the Irish, inexplicably ignored for years, have brought this time some problems. For the non-payment of contributions in Italy, the prosecutor Maria Letizia Mocciaro, thanks to the material collected by the Provincial Labour Directorate and inspectors INPS Bergamo, has investigated O'Leary and the Director of Legal Affairs of the Irish company, Juliusz Komorek. The same is summoned to appear Feb. 20 in front of an employment tribunal Giuseppina Finazzi, which will determine which social security legislation was applied for prior learning, employees Ryanair. While waiting for the verdict, it is certain that the Irish have saved tens of millions of euro is not paid to the coffers of our security. And thanks to this (alleged) failure have been able to charge rates lower than their competitors. Not anymore: the decree growth 2.0 The government has considered Ryanair the same way as all the other Italian companies in accordance with the principle that taxes and contributions are paid in the state where it generates profit.
In light of the unconditional surrender of O'Leary ("Leaving Italy after the new law? Forget it"), it is surprising that most of our MPs have lobbied to soften the blow to the Irish company. As if to say, basically, that the law is not that the same for everyone. Them, men of the State, had been alerted by Sacbo, the management company of the airport of Orio, concerned that Ryanair, after the crackdown, could leave Italy. A fear that gave rise to the nerve of management may be too focused on the marriage of convenience with the low cost airline. Union ten years has brought benefits to both grown exponentially. One record after another, in the euphoria of numbers that may have obfuscated the details. How come no one has reported the INPS and the ministry of labor to pay the fault of Ryanair? Anyone working with a public body is obliged to submit the Durch (SPD regular contributions). A glance at the to realize that something was wrong.
RICCARDO Nisoli
January 11, 2013 | 9:11
© REPRODUCTION RESERVED
Sorry A&C but t looks like MOL isn't in the lead anymore....
Il passo indietro di mr. Ryanair - Corriere Bergamo
Michael O'Leary
From 1 January 2013 Ryanair is registered at the Chamber of Commerce of Milan. This is the final step in a process of regularization of the low cost airline world's most powerful (who now pay tuition and fees in Italy), sealed by the statements of Wednesday's patron Michael O 'Leary: "If Italy changes the law, we respect. In any base we operate, we respect the rules and do it in Italy. For this also solve the disputes. " It is worth remembering that the disputes referred to Mister Ryanair originated in the question rather well founded, that in the past the giant of the skies has considered its employees from time to time Irish or Italian depending on your convenience. Rather than comply with the law, according to legal fronts open, Ryanair would be adequate for years two rules (perhaps not coincidentally O'Leary used the plural) to Dublin, when it came to pay less taxes and contributions, and that of Rome, when he is tacitly allowed its employees usufruissero of our health care, though not right.
The shyster turns from the Irish, inexplicably ignored for years, have brought this time some problems. For the non-payment of contributions in Italy, the prosecutor Maria Letizia Mocciaro, thanks to the material collected by the Provincial Labour Directorate and inspectors INPS Bergamo, has investigated O'Leary and the Director of Legal Affairs of the Irish company, Juliusz Komorek. The same is summoned to appear Feb. 20 in front of an employment tribunal Giuseppina Finazzi, which will determine which social security legislation was applied for prior learning, employees Ryanair. While waiting for the verdict, it is certain that the Irish have saved tens of millions of euro is not paid to the coffers of our security. And thanks to this (alleged) failure have been able to charge rates lower than their competitors. Not anymore: the decree growth 2.0 The government has considered Ryanair the same way as all the other Italian companies in accordance with the principle that taxes and contributions are paid in the state where it generates profit.
In light of the unconditional surrender of O'Leary ("Leaving Italy after the new law? Forget it"), it is surprising that most of our MPs have lobbied to soften the blow to the Irish company. As if to say, basically, that the law is not that the same for everyone. Them, men of the State, had been alerted by Sacbo, the management company of the airport of Orio, concerned that Ryanair, after the crackdown, could leave Italy. A fear that gave rise to the nerve of management may be too focused on the marriage of convenience with the low cost airline. Union ten years has brought benefits to both grown exponentially. One record after another, in the euphoria of numbers that may have obfuscated the details. How come no one has reported the INPS and the ministry of labor to pay the fault of Ryanair? Anyone working with a public body is obliged to submit the Durch (SPD regular contributions). A glance at the to realize that something was wrong.
RICCARDO Nisoli
January 11, 2013 | 9:11
© REPRODUCTION RESERVED
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Milano
Age: 53
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
has anyone who has actually been contacted by any authority got any contribution? It would appear many of these "rumours" are speculation!
I'm not surprised that anybody who is directly involved is not posting, seeing as FR has already tried to subpoena a poster's data (an alleged FR employee) and has already threatened legal action against several websites.
Last edited by Dg800; 14th Jan 2013 at 08:50.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Milano
Age: 53
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Even if you do all of the above you are not completely safe but it makes you a tougher target compared to others...........
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Milano
Age: 53
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How about the double taxation agreement between Ireland and Italy? What does it say?
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Earth
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a current RYR pilot who has friends in the base concerned and access to our own association forums where this is being discussed in much more detail than an open public forum, I can tell you this is very real.
Initially it started off with RYR employed pilots and cabin crew. Just recently contractors who are based in BGY have started to receive letters for tax payments dating back to 2006. Past and present based personnel.
So far its only confined to our Bergamo base.
Initially it started off with RYR employed pilots and cabin crew. Just recently contractors who are based in BGY have started to receive letters for tax payments dating back to 2006. Past and present based personnel.
So far its only confined to our Bergamo base.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Milano
Age: 53
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
See post \\22 so far there is no evidence that anyone has been contacted regarding this issue!
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Forgetting about the legality of this for one minute. Can a Ryan Air pilot on this thread confirm or deny that the vast majority of their pilots are "self employed" and not on fixed contracts and employed by the firm ???
I would love to read the agreement between "supplier" and contractor, especially on the conditions of liability and incompetence. If said skipper spears into the Irish Sea due to pilot error who writes the compo cheque ??
Is this common in the budget sector ?? I'm a helicopter pilot and we're used to this, don't fly, don't eat nonsense. But if this is how it works in airlines - tell me now please becuase I'm about to book a cruise from now on. I hear Costa Concordia cruises are cheap !!!!
I would love to read the agreement between "supplier" and contractor, especially on the conditions of liability and incompetence. If said skipper spears into the Irish Sea due to pilot error who writes the compo cheque ??
Is this common in the budget sector ?? I'm a helicopter pilot and we're used to this, don't fly, don't eat nonsense. But if this is how it works in airlines - tell me now please becuase I'm about to book a cruise from now on. I hear Costa Concordia cruises are cheap !!!!
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can a Ryan Air pilot on this thread confirm or deny that the vast majority of their pilots are "self employed" and not on fixed contracts and employed by the firm ???
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Last published from 31/3-12 says that [[B]roughly 1600 pilots are self employed........ [B]
Debateable!
Debateable!
Last edited by RAT 5; 14th Jan 2013 at 18:38.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Cloud Cookoo Land
Posts: 1,270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There isn't 2400 pilots in Ryanair to my knowledge. Unless the exodus to Emirates was that massive or unless there is a refusal to acknowledge 200hr sky gods as being actual pilots then the figure appears to be missing around 1000 'glorified bus drivers.' Which would most probably be contractors I'd hasten to add!
Last edited by Callsign Kilo; 14th Jan 2013 at 19:59.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: I wish I knew
Posts: 624
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dg800... I personally have seen nothing in the national newspapers about this topic.. perhaps you can kindly provide a link to the story.. I am aware that some CX pilots have now received massive tax demands from the HK IRD as their contracts " off-shore" from HK seem to have been a complete cock up and they have been left exposed .bills ranging from 50-150K GBP! ( HKD equivalent ). but so far nothing from any colleagues at RYR. However, NAS is now putting pilots through " a company in Spain " rather than direct employment.. it seems the onus will move more towards the pilots to declare. or not, as they feel lucky, their earnings and stump up the taxes or creatively avoid...
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Avenger
Not so re NAS contract pilots all are employed by agencies and the contract prohibits "self employed" status.
They get holiday,sick & standby pay and are taxed at source by the agency in accordance with their base. They also receive an additional block hour payment based on what you did, not what you were rostered to do, so yes holding and diversions are paid. The ratio of contract pilots is around 25/75% compared to permeant employee's (B738 Fleet)
Non of the agencies are Spanish
They get holiday,sick & standby pay and are taxed at source by the agency in accordance with their base. They also receive an additional block hour payment based on what you did, not what you were rostered to do, so yes holding and diversions are paid. The ratio of contract pilots is around 25/75% compared to permeant employee's (B738 Fleet)
Non of the agencies are Spanish