Discussion
Uber loses appeal against a ruling that its drivers should be treated as workers rather than self employed
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46617584
Judgment here https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/1...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46617584
Judgment here https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/1...
JPJPJP said:
Uber loses appeal against a ruling that its drivers should be treated as workers rather than self employed
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46617584
Judgment here https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/1...
Uber's response? "It wasn't unanimous, so off to the Supreme Court we go." This case has been rumbling on since at least 2016 so far...https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46617584
Judgment here https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/1...
There is a hearing scheduled for early Feb
It seems it will mostly focus on the matter of a protective costs order for Maugham / GLP
https://twitter.com/jolyonmaugham/status/108482084...
It seems it will mostly focus on the matter of a protective costs order for Maugham / GLP
https://twitter.com/jolyonmaugham/status/108482084...
Good Law Project's application for a protective costs order against Uber is being heard this very morning
Uber is, as one would expect, resisting
Links to skeleton arguments of both sides included in the tweet below
https://twitter.com/GoodLawProject/status/10930879...
Uber is, as one would expect, resisting
Links to skeleton arguments of both sides included in the tweet below
https://twitter.com/GoodLawProject/status/10930879...
The application for a protective costs order has been dismissed
Good law project has to pay Uber > £100k in costs
An appeal is mentioned and potential new proceedings against HMRC
https://goodlawproject.org/uber-protective-costs-a...
Good law project has to pay Uber > £100k in costs
An appeal is mentioned and potential new proceedings against HMRC
https://goodlawproject.org/uber-protective-costs-a...
JPJPJP said:
The application for a protective costs order has been dismissed
Good law project has to pay Uber > £100k in costs
An appeal is mentioned and potential new proceedings against HMRC
https://goodlawproject.org/uber-protective-costs-a...
I’m generally supportive of GLP but this seemed bound to fail as the actual action (claim for a VAT invoice) seems to be outside of the scope of a PCO. An appeal might be interesting, but having read the judgement it seems hard but not impossible to see how it can succeed.Good law project has to pay Uber > £100k in costs
An appeal is mentioned and potential new proceedings against HMRC
https://goodlawproject.org/uber-protective-costs-a...
Whilst I do understand why GLP didn’t go to a judicial review in this issue, it still seems like the more rational course of action - especially because a PCO would most likely be available.
The next step in GLP's Uber VAT mission
https://twitter.com/GoodLawProject/status/11033466...
This bit looks as though it might be interesting
https://twitter.com/GoodLawProject/status/11033488...
https://twitter.com/GoodLawProject/status/11033466...
This bit looks as though it might be interesting
https://twitter.com/GoodLawProject/status/11033488...
JPJPJP said:
The next step in GLP's Uber VAT mission
https://twitter.com/GoodLawProject/status/11033466...
This bit looks as though it might be interesting
https://twitter.com/GoodLawProject/status/11033488...
Well, later this week has come and - largely - gone without any follow-up from this...https://twitter.com/GoodLawProject/status/11033466...
This bit looks as though it might be interesting
https://twitter.com/GoodLawProject/status/11033488...
Yes, there has been a disappointing delay / absence of news. But here is another update
A piece in the Sunday times suggesting HMRC has been looking and that the good law project is about to sue HMRC for ‘failing to act in relation to uber’s Tax dodging’
|https://thumbsnap.com/rwHfMCXk[/url]
https://twitter.com/goodlawproject/status/11300309...
[url]
A piece in the Sunday times suggesting HMRC has been looking and that the good law project is about to sue HMRC for ‘failing to act in relation to uber’s Tax dodging’
|https://thumbsnap.com/rwHfMCXk[/url]https://twitter.com/goodlawproject/status/11300309...
[url]Edited by anonymous-user on Sunday 19th May 14:43
Later than it was signposted to be, but proceedings have been issued today apparently
https://twitter.com/JolyonMaugham/status/113376773...
The documents are here
https://goodlawproject.org/good-law-project-sues-h...
https://twitter.com/JolyonMaugham/status/113376773...
The documents are here
https://goodlawproject.org/good-law-project-sues-h...
HMRC has applied for a “swingeing” confidentiality order to protect basic details of the judicial review from disclosure
https://twitter.com/goodlawproject/status/11441262...
https://twitter.com/goodlawproject/status/11441262...
A bit of movement
A hearing on issues associated with the case on 6 Nov but there is this little section in the most recently filed accounts
The FT (https://ftalphaville.ft.com/2019/10/09/1570629132000/Uber-s-UK-VAT-liability-confirmed/) or google "ubers uk vat liability confirmed" if you are not an FT subscriber suggests
'The most newsworthy part was arguably this one: “the Uber Group is involved in an ongoing dialog with HMRC, which is seeking to classify the Uber Group as a transportation provider. Being classified as a transportation provider would result in a VAT (20%) on Gross Bookings or on the service fee that the Company charges Drivers, both retroactively and prospectively."
...
Of course, the fact that Uber London since filed a company account noting that a dialogue with HMRC over a VAT liability is ongoing implies some sort of protective assessment may already have been initiated. So to some extent the cat is already out of the bag.'
A hearing on issues associated with the case on 6 Nov but there is this little section in the most recently filed accounts
The FT (https://ftalphaville.ft.com/2019/10/09/1570629132000/Uber-s-UK-VAT-liability-confirmed/) or google "ubers uk vat liability confirmed" if you are not an FT subscriber suggests
'The most newsworthy part was arguably this one: “the Uber Group is involved in an ongoing dialog with HMRC, which is seeking to classify the Uber Group as a transportation provider. Being classified as a transportation provider would result in a VAT (20%) on Gross Bookings or on the service fee that the Company charges Drivers, both retroactively and prospectively."
...
Of course, the fact that Uber London since filed a company account noting that a dialogue with HMRC over a VAT liability is ongoing implies some sort of protective assessment may already have been initiated. So to some extent the cat is already out of the bag.'
JPJPJP said:
A bit of movement
A hearing on issues associated with the case on 6 Nov but there is this little section in the most recently filed accounts
The FT (https://ftalphaville.ft.com/2019/10/09/1570629132000/Uber-s-UK-VAT-liability-confirmed/) or google "ubers uk vat liability confirmed" if you are not an FT subscriber suggests
'The most newsworthy part was arguably this one: “the Uber Group is involved in an ongoing dialog with HMRC, which is seeking to classify the Uber Group as a transportation provider. Being classified as a transportation provider would result in a VAT (20%) on Gross Bookings or on the service fee that the Company charges Drivers, both retroactively and prospectively."
...
Of course, the fact that Uber London since filed a company account noting that a dialogue with HMRC over a VAT liability is ongoing implies some sort of protective assessment may already have been initiated. So to some extent the cat is already out of the bag.'
Protective assessments cover periods that go out of time while an investigation is ongoing, whether they're issued or not there's always 4 years of retrospective liability from the date of any assessment.A hearing on issues associated with the case on 6 Nov but there is this little section in the most recently filed accounts
The FT (https://ftalphaville.ft.com/2019/10/09/1570629132000/Uber-s-UK-VAT-liability-confirmed/) or google "ubers uk vat liability confirmed" if you are not an FT subscriber suggests
'The most newsworthy part was arguably this one: “the Uber Group is involved in an ongoing dialog with HMRC, which is seeking to classify the Uber Group as a transportation provider. Being classified as a transportation provider would result in a VAT (20%) on Gross Bookings or on the service fee that the Company charges Drivers, both retroactively and prospectively."
...
Of course, the fact that Uber London since filed a company account noting that a dialogue with HMRC over a VAT liability is ongoing implies some sort of protective assessment may already have been initiated. So to some extent the cat is already out of the bag.'
It doesn't really tell you a lot. The last VAT ding dong I was involved with (with about £1m at stake) took 18 months from asking HMRC for clearance to them giving 'an opinion' (adverse to us). By the time I left the company they still hadn't issued an assessment so nothing was particularly formal by that time. Our accounts included a liability line for the disputed amounts and HMRC had given an initial opinion, but nothing more had happened.
JPJPJP said:
And, lurking in the background still is employer’s national insurance. If the Supreme Court rules uber is an employer, it could have to pay that too.
A contingent liability is mentioned in Uber Inc’s accounts filed in the US
So will Addison Lee and everybody else including 'arry's minicabs, the Arches, 'ighgate.A contingent liability is mentioned in Uber Inc’s accounts filed in the US
No?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff