Connect with us

Published

on

Two dozen MPs since 2016 have been paid for second jobs through personal service companies they have set up, a Sky News investigation has found.

It means these MPs can exploit the fact that tax rates on companies differ from those on employment, enabling them to reduce their tax bills on second jobs.

This practice is legal and common in certain industries, but some MPs appear to have taken further steps to reduce their taxes on non-parliamentary earnings.

Lib Dem leader Sir Ed Davey is one of 12 MPs to have received earnings from second jobs via companies owned partly or solely by their spouse, an arrangement accounting experts have said is often used to reduce taxes.

Search for your MP using the Westminster Accounts tool

Sir Ed and his wife also appear to have taken advantage of a loophole that allows reduced tax rates to be paid on money taken out of a company when it’s closed. More than £100,000 was sitting on the balance sheet of the company through which Sir Ed received payment for five second jobs held between 2017 and 2022, before the company was liquidated earlier this year.

Ex-cabinet minister Ranil Jayawardena, another to receive earnings from second jobs via a company owned with his wife, claims to have been doing two separate roles with the same company at the same time between 2017 and 2020 – an arrangement that may have afforded him further tax benefits.

More on Westminster Accounts

Sky News spoke to more than half a dozen tax and accounting experts who confirmed that, while all payments are likely lawful, MPs can use these methods to reduce taxes on their earnings from second jobs.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

SNP questions PM on Westminster Accounts

Use of personal service companies enables taxes to be minimised

By setting up companies through which they offer their consultancy services – known as personal service companies – MPs pay corporation tax and dividend taxes on their non-parliamentary work, rather than income taxes, as they do on their MP salary.

In receiving money this way, some MPs can reduce their tax rate by around 5% on their additional jobs, depending on how much they’re earning.

But using these companies enables additional ways through which taxes can be minimised.

Giving spouses or other family members a salary or shares in the MP’s business can further reduce tax bills. If the family member is a basic rate taxpayer, they would pay tax rates almost four times lower on dividends received from the company than an MP, who are higher rate taxpayers.

Of the 24 MPs using these companies, 12 list a family member as a shareholder or director.

But perhaps the biggest tax benefit when using a personal service company comes when earnings from second jobs are built up in the company before it is closed down and liquidated.

Under these circumstances, tax rates on additional earnings for MPs – who pay 40% tax on the upper end of their £84,144 MP salary – can be as low as the 10% capital gains tax rate paid on assets when a company is closed.

Three MPs have liquidated companies through which they were receiving their second earnings and two of these – Sir Ed Davey and Robert Butler – had significant amounts of cash on the balance sheet when the companies were closed.

Click to subscribe to the Sky News Daily wherever you get your podcasts

Energy Destinations Ltd, the company Sir Ed’s earnings were paid into, was closed in June this year with £103,717 of assets distributed upon its liquidation. The company was previously transferred from Mr Davey to his wife in 2017, but he continued to receive more than £350,000 in payments from second jobs into the company until earlier this year.

‘It’s perfectly legal, but is it fair?’

HMRC introduced rules in 2016 to stop the practice of opening and closing companies as a means of obtaining relief.

The tax break can still be used however as long as the business owner doesn’t open a new company within two years doing similar work.

Ian Dickinson, tax director of UHY Hacker Young, said of people taking active steps in this way to reduce taxes on their work:

“It’s within that parameter of tax avoidance, which is perfectly legal, but is it fair?

“If you’ve got people exploiting the rules trying to pay as little as possible, using convoluted structures, that are well known but beyond the remit of the normal person, it just doesn’t sit right.”

Experts have criticised the wider system that encourages these arrangements. Judith Freedman, emeritus professor of taxation law and policy at the University of Oxford said: “We have a poorly designed tax system. We should be taxing people operating through different legal forms in far more similar ways.

“There’s the fact that you can convert your labour income into capital. That’s a problem. There’s the fact that you can income split. That’s a problem. And there’s the fact that you don’t pay any national insurance on dividends. That’s a problem”.

Read more:
SNP demands ‘root-and-branch’ reform of MPs’ outside earnings
‘The next big scandal’ – Informal groups of MPs given £20m from external organisations since 2019

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Could all-party parliamentary groups represent ‘next big scandal’?

MPs run the risk of breaking the rules

A spokesperson for Sir Ed said: “All of Ed’s business was entirely in keeping with the rules, and he has been fully transparent about it.

“Money that his wife earned also went into the company. All capital gains tax due on the proceeds will be paid.”

People close to Sir Ed were also keen to point out that the Liberal Democrat leader’s earnings helped fund care for his disabled son.

While the use of personal service companies to manage second-job earnings is legal, there is one area where tax experts have told Sky News that some MPs could be running the risk of breaking rules.

It relates to whether MPs’ second jobs are considered consultancy roles or whether they are deemed employment by a company. If the latter, additional taxes are likely due when receiving earnings through their own companies.

Three MPs – Mark Pritchard, Ranil Jayawardena, and Ed Davey – have taken on jobs that HMRC considers employment – non-executive directorships – while still receiving fees for these jobs through their companies.

It is possible to make a voluntary declaration to HMRC to ensure the correct taxes are paid on these jobs, but experts said that people typically rarely do so when receiving fees via a company. In these circumstances the company is an “unnecessary structure”, according to employment status expert Rebecca Seeley-Harris, although there is no evidence to suggest these three MPs have not made the required voluntary declaration.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

‘Ban MPs from working second jobs’

‘A dangerous operation’

Former environment secretary Mr Jayawardena had a particularly unusual arrangement, where he appears to have done two different jobs for the same company at the same time between 2017 and 2020.

His personal service company received share options valued at £20,000 per year from pharmaceutical company PepTCell Ltd in return for providing “a non-executive director for approximately four days a year”, according to his entry in the register of members’ financial interests. Companies House filings confirm Mr Jayawardena was a director of PepTCell.

But Mr Jayawardena also declared a second role as a strategic consultant with PepTCell at the same time, with his own company again receiving share options valued at £20,000 in return for four days work per year.

Ms Seeley-Harris noted that an arrangement like this would need to have clear delineations to ensure there weren’t tax issues, but that the nature of the two roles made this difficult.

“If you’re both a consultant and a non-executive director (NED), the consultant work has to be an entirely different piece of work. So you can’t give strategic advice to a company that you’re a non-executive director of, where your job as an NED is to give strategic advice.

“I’m surprised in this day and age that the accountants aren’t advising them that they can’t do that, it’s such a dangerous operation.”

Mr Jayawardena didn’t respond when asked for comment by Sky News.

Continue Reading

UK

Russell Brand charged with rape and sexual assault

Published

on

By

Russell Brand charged with rape and sexual assault

Russell Brand has been charged with rape and two counts of sexual assault between 1999 and 2005.

The Metropolitan Police say the 50-year-old comedian, actor and author has also been charged with one count of oral rape and one count of indecent assault.

The charges relate to four women.

He is due to appear at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on Friday 2 May.

Police have said Brand is accused of raping a woman in the Bournemouth area in 1999 and indecently assaulting a woman in the Westminster area of London in 2001.

He is also accused of orally raping and sexually assaulting a woman in Westminster in 2004.

The fourth charge alleges that a woman was sexually assaulted in Westminster between 2004 and 2005.

Police began investigating Brand, from Oxfordshire, in September 2023 after receiving a number of allegations.

Read more from Sky News:
Mum spared prison after son’s death
Last UK blast furnaces days from closure
Ship owner files legal claim after North Sea crash

The comedian has previously denied the accusations, and said all his sexual relationships were “absolutely always consensual”.

Met Police Detective Superintendent Andy Furphy, who is leading the investigation, said: “The women who have made reports continue to receive support from specially trained officers.

“The Met’s investigation remains open and detectives ask anyone who has been affected by this case, or anyone who has any information, to come forward and speak with police.”

Continue Reading

UK

Last UK blast furnaces days from closure as Chinese owners cut off crucial supplies

Published

on

By

Last UK blast furnaces days from closure as Chinese owners cut off crucial supplies

​​​​​​​The last blast furnaces left operating in Britain could see their fate sealed within days, after their Chinese owners took the decision to cut off the crucial supply of ingredients keeping them running. 

Jingye, the owner of British Steel in Scunthorpe, has, according to union representatives, cancelled future orders for the iron ore, coal and other raw materials needed to keep the furnaces running.

The upshot is that they may have to close next month – even sooner than the earliest date suggested for its closure.

Read more: Thousands of jobs at risk as British Steel consults unions over closure

The fate of the blast furnaces – the last two domestic sources of virgin steel, made from iron ore rather than recycled – is likely to be determined in a matter of days, with the Department for Business and Trade now actively pondering nationalisation.

The upshot is that even as Britain contends with a trade war across the Atlantic, it is now working against the clock to secure the future of steelmaking at Scunthorpe.

British Steel proceesing

The talks between the government and Jingye broke down last week after the Chinese company, which bought British Steel out of receivership in 2020, rejected a £500m offer of public money to replace the existing furnaces with electric arc furnaces.

More on China

The sum is the same one it offered to Tata Steel, which has shut down the other remaining UK blast furnaces in Port Talbot and is planning to build electric furnaces – which have far lower carbon emissions.

These steel workers could soon be out of work
Image:
These steel workers could soon be out of work

However, the owners argue that the amount is too little to justify extra investment at Scunthorpe, and said last week they were now consulting on the date of shutting both the blast furnaces and the attached steelworks.

Since British Steel is the main provider of steel rails to Network Rail – as well as other construction steels available from only a few sites in the world – the closure would leave the UK more reliant on imports for critical infrastructure sites.

British Steel in action

However, since the site belongs to its Chinese owners, a decision to nationalise the site would involve radical steps government officials are wary of taking.

They also fear leaving taxpayers exposed to a potentially loss-making business for the long run.

British Steel

The dilemma has been heightened by the sharp turn in geopolitical sentiment following Donald Trump’s return to the White House.

The incipient trade war and threatened cut in American support to Europe have sparked fresh calls for countries to act urgently to secure their own supplies of critical materials, especially those used for defence and infrastructure.

Read more:
Car manufacturers fined £461m for collusion
There were no winners from Trump’s tariff gameshow

Gareth Stace, head of UK Steel, the industry lobby group, said: “Talks seem to have broken down between government and British Steel.

“My advice to government is: please, Jonathan Reynolds, Business Secretary, get back round that negotiating table, thrash out a deal, and if a deal can’t be found in the next few days, then I fear for the very future of the sector, but also here for Scunthorpe steelworks.”

British Steel declined to comment.

Continue Reading

UK

Prince Andrew’s Pitch@Palace branded ‘crude attempt to enrich himself’ as Chinese spy documents set to be released

Published

on

By

Prince Andrew's Pitch@Palace branded 'crude attempt to enrich himself' as Chinese spy documents set to be released

Prince Andrew’s efforts to make money from his Pitch@Palace project have been branded as a “crude attempt to enrich himself” at the expense of “unsuspecting tech founders”, as new documents may shed more light on what he and his team have been attempting to sell.

Today is the deadline for documents to be released relating to Prince Andrew‘s former senior adviser Dominic Hampshire and his interactions with the alleged Chinese spy Yang Tengbo.

In February, an immigration tribunal heard how the intelligence services had contacted Mr Hampshire about Mr Yang back in 2022. Mr Yang helped set up Pitch@Palace China, a branch of the duke’s scheme to help young entrepreneurs.

The alleged Chinese spy, Yang Tengbo, has links with Prince Andrew
Image:
The alleged Chinese spy, Yang Tengbo, has links with Prince Andrew

Pic: Pitch@Palace
Image:
Yang Tengbo. Pic: Pitch@Palace

Judges banned Mr Yang from the UK, saying his association with a senior royal had made Prince Andrew “vulnerable” and posed a threat to national security. Mr Yang challenged that decision at the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC).

Since that hearing, media organisations have applied for certain documents relating to the case and Mr Hampshire’s support for Mr Yang to be made public. SIAC agreed to release some information of public interest. It is hoped they may include more details on deals that he was trying to do on behalf of Prince Andrew.

So what do we know about potential deals for Pitch@Palace so far?

In February, Sky News confirmed that palace officials had a meeting last summer with tech funding company StartupBootcamp to discuss a potential tie-up between them and Prince Andrew relating to his Pitch@Palace project.

More on Prince Andrew

The palace wasn’t involved in the fine details of a deal but wanted guarantees to make sure it wouldn’t impact the Royal Family in the future. Sky News understands from one source that the price being discussed for Pitch was around £750,000 – there are, however, reports that a deal may have stalled.

Photos we found on the Chinese Chamber of Commerce website show an event held in Asia between StartupBootcamp and Innovate Global, believed to be an offshoot of Pitch.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Who is alleged Chinese spy, Yang Tengbo?

Documents, released in relation to the investigations into Mr Tengbo, have also shown how much the duke has always seen Pitch as a way of potentially making money. One document from 21 August 2021 clearly states “the duke needed money at the time, and saw the relationships with China through Pitch as one possible source of funding”.

But Prince Andrew’s apparent intention to use Pitch to make money has led to concerns about whether he is unfairly using the contacts and information he gained when he was a working royal.

Norman Baker, former MP and author of books on royal finances, believes it is “a crude attempt to enrich himself” and goes against what the tech entrepreneurs thought they were signing up for.

Read more:
Who is Yang Tenbo?
Virginia Giuffre says she has days to live
Emails between Andrew and Epstein revealed

He told Sky News: “The data given by these business people was given on the basis it was an official operation and not something for Prince Andrew, and so in my view, Prince Andrew had no right legally or morally to take the data which has been collected, a huge amount of data, and sell it…

“And quite clearly if you’re going to sell it off to StartupBootcamp, that is not what people had in mind. The entrepreneurs who joined Pitch@Palace did not do so to enrich Prince Andrew,” he said.

Rich Wilson was one tech entrepreneur who was approached at the start of Pitch@Palace to sign up, but he stepped away when he spotted a clause in the contract saying they’d be entitled to 2% equity in any funding he secured.

He feels Prince Andrew is continuing to use those he made a show of supporting.

He said: “It makes me feel sick. I think it’s terrible – that he is continuing to exploit unsuspecting tech founders in this way. A lot of them, I’m quite grey and old in the tooth now, I saw it coming, but clearly most didn’t. And a lot of them were quite young.

“It’ll be their first venture and you’re learning on the trot, so to speak. So to take advantage of people in such a major way – that’s an awful, sickening thing to do.”

We approached StartupBootcamp who said they had no comment to make, and the Duke of York’s office did not respond.

With reports that a deal may have stalled, it could be a big setback for the duke – especially with questions still about how he’ll continue to pay for his home on the Windsor estate now that the King no longer gives him financial support.

Continue Reading

Trending