Hays, Capita, Petrofac. These are some of Britain’s best known companies and big players in the recruitment industry.
Now, a Sky News investigation has revealed how, over the course of two decades, some of Britain’s biggest recruitment companies were linked to large-scale tax avoidance when placing workers into jobs, including government roles in Whitehall.
Many of these workers, typically agency workers and contractors, were paid by third-party umbrella companies that promised to take care of taxes but were operating tax avoidance schemes.
They worked by paying workers what were technically loans, instead of a salary. This allowed them to circumvent paying income tax.
Often the umbrellas were recommended by recruiters, although there is no suggestion the recruiters knew these third-parties were operating tax avoidance schemes.
It is the latest revelation in a scandal that has caused untold misery for tens of thousands of people, who signed up with umbrella companies and were enrolled in tax avoidance schemes, thinking they were above board.
Many feel let down by the recruitment agencies who provided information linking them to the umbrella companies. They were not legally responsible for collecting the tax, as they did not run the payroll.
But the government is now strengthening the law to make them accountable for the tax collected by umbrella agencies on behalf of the workers they supply.
Tax avoidance is legal but HMRC has successfully challenged tax avoidance schemes in the courts and workers have subsequently asked to pay the missing tax.
In some cases, the tax demands have been crippling. It’s a campaign that has driven people to the brink of bankruptcy, devastated families and has been linked to 10 suicides.
Manuel’s story
Manuel Bernal did not doubt his working arrangement after taking on a piping supervisor job through Atlantic Resourcing, the recruitment arm of the energy giant Petrofac. In 2006, he was placed on an EDF plant in the Shetlands.
He received a contract between Atlantic Resourcing and an umbrella company, which managed his pay.
Weeks after he started working, he says he was pushed into an arrangement with a different company, which took over the payments. Hundreds of people were working on the site and “everybody on the management side was on that scheme”, he said.
Mr Bernal was assured that everything was above board. He did not know that he was in a tax avoidance scheme.
Image: Manuel Bernal was not aware he was exposed to a tax avoidance scheme
The company was paying him a loan instead of a salary, via a trust, so avoided income tax and National Insurance.
However, HMRC soon caught on and demanded he pay the missing tax for what it now deemed disguised remuneration.
“At the time, I was in two minds [whether] to pay or not to pay… At the time I couldn’t pay. I was short of money because I had cancer and I couldn’t work… I thought, ‘why should they not pay any money?'” said Mr Bernal.
Tax avoidance is the exploitation of legal loopholes to pay less tax. It is legal. It is not the same as tax evasion, which involves not paying or underpaying taxes and is illegal.
The scheme Mr Bernal was in, like other tax avoidance schemes, stretched the boundaries of the law.
Years later, HMRC successfully challenged the lawfulness of loan schemes in the courts. Workers paid the price. Irrespective of how they entered the schemes, they were deemed responsible for their own tax affairs.
In a statement, Petrofac said: “Like any other company, we are not involved in, or responsible for, the administration of taxes for self-employed limited company contractors.”
The company stopped using umbrella agencies in 2016 after an internal review.
Six-figure demands
Manuel got off comparatively lightly. Having only worked at the site for a few months, his bill came in at £4,000, but others are facing six-figure demands. HMRC has pursued around 50,000 people.
Schemes like these proliferated from the early 2000s.
At the time the use of umbrella companies was becoming popular as workers were worried about falling foul of new rules – originally designed by Gordon Brown – that clamped down on contractors operating as limited companies.
Image: HMRC has pursued around 50,000 people for missing tax
Umbrella companies would manage the payroll so that businesses could avoid bringing workers onto their direct payroll. Others asked workers, like Manuel, to declare as self-employed, while continuing to distribute their pay.
Many umbrellas paid PAYE to the exchequer, but tax avoidance companies also entered the market.
Workers assumed their tax was being paid, but the schemes were pocketing deductions instead of passing them on to the exchequer.
The Treasury became alert to the scale of the missing tax revenue and sought to recoup it – not from the companies but from the individuals.
Image: People have protested about the loan charge outside parliament. Pic: PA
These schemes were deemed disguised remuneration and, in his 2016 budget, former chancellor George Osborne brought in the loan charge.
In its original form, the loan charge calculated the tax on up to 20 years of income as if it was earned in one financial year – 2018/19. The resulting sums caused considerable financial distress.
Mr Bernal said: “(HMRC) kept sending letters when I was in hospital and my wife had to deal with it. Eventually, I sent in a doctor’s report and they stopped.”
‘I trusted them’
Loan schemes became enmeshed in the recruitment supply chain.
Many recruiters were not aware the umbrella companies they were working with were tax avoidance schemes. However, the strength of their recommendations often gave workers confidence.
John (not his real name), an IT worker, felt he was in safe hands when he used an umbrella company that was on an approved list given to him by the recruiter Hays in 2010.
Image: Hays is one of the best known recruitment agencies in the UK. Pic: PA
“I thought Hays is one of the biggest recruitment companies in the country,” he said. “They’re saying they are okay, so I started using them.”
Hays said it “engages only with umbrella companies that appropriately meet legal and financial obligations… We conduct thorough due diligence… we recommend (contractors) also do their due diligence”.
HMRC has previously warned recruitment agencies they face penalties if they refer people to non-compliant umbrella companies but it has not confirmed whether fines have ever been levied.
Meanwhile, new tax avoidance promoters continue to enter the market.
A recent government report concluded there could be “70 to 80 non-compliant umbrella companies involved in the operation of disguised remuneration avoidance schemes”.
Crackdown
The government is now attempting to clean up the industry. It plans to hold recruitment companies legally responsible for PAYE, rather than umbrella companies.
Sky News understands that the Treasury will today unveil a package of reforms it will consult on as part of a crackdown on tax avoidance schemes.
However, this offers little respite to those who have already fallen victim to these schemes.
While in opposition, key Labour Party figures railed against what they described as mis-selling and promised they would review the policy.
The government has now launched an independent review into the loan charge – and HMRC is pausing its activity until that review is complete – but its focus is on helping people to reach a settlement. The review will not look at the historical role of promoters and recruitment agencies.
That is a bitter pill to swallow for those affected by the loan charge, particularly as many of them were working for the government itself.
‘I sent them a suicide note’
Peter (not his real name) worked at the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills as a project manager for the regional growth fund, a role he was recruited into in 2012 by the agency Capita.
He said Capita recommended he use an umbrella arrangement, which he was told was above board.
“I’m really angry. [Capita] gave me confidence. They are the key agency for central government work… If Capita say something to you then you believe it’s correct. You have to trust what you’re told.”
Capita said: “We have strict policies in place to ensure both Capita and our suppliers comply with relevant law, policies and procedures. Given this was over 12 years ago, we do not have the details to be able to comment on this particular matter.”
Sky News has spoken to other Whitehall workers who have also been affected.
Image: Capita says it has strict policies to ensure the company and suppliers comply with the law. Pic: PA
After the loan charge came into force, Peter was inundated with letters from HMRC. It became overwhelming and in 2019 he tried to take his own life.
“I sent them [HMRC] a suicide note because I was just fed up with all of this,” he said. “I’ve been on anti-depressants. I live in denial. I drink alcohol sometimes quite a bit.”
HMRC said it takes the wellbeing of taxpayers seriously and believes it has made significant improvements to its support services in recent years.
The government department Peter worked for has since been fashioned into the Department for Business and Trade.
It said it was unable to comment on the previous department’s arrangements with Capita but said the government was cracking down on non-compliant umbrella companies.
Anyone feeling emotionally distressed or suicidal can call Samaritans for help on 116 123 or email jo@samaritans.org in the UK. In the US, call the Samaritans branch in your area or 1 (800) 273-TALK
Quintessentially, the luxury concierge service founded by the Queen’s nephew, is in talks to find a buyer months after it warned of “material uncertainty” over its future.
Sky News has learned that the company, which was set up by Sir Ben Elliot and his business partners in 1999, is working with advisers on a process aimed at finding a new owner or investors.
City sources said this weekend that Quintessentially was already in discussions with prospective buyers and was anticipating receipt of a number of firm offers.
Sir Ben, the former Conservative Party co-chairman under Boris Johnson, owns a significant minority stake in the company.
The Quintessentially group operates a number of businesses, although its core activity remains the provision of lifestyle support to high net worth individuals including celebrities, royalty, and leading businesspeople.
It also counts major companies among its clients and offers services such as organising private jet flights and performances by top musicians.
The sale process is being overseen by a firm called Beyond, although further details, including the price that the business might fetch, were unclear on Saturday.
More from Money
One insider said parties who had been contacted by Beyond were being offered the option to buy a controlling interest in Quintessentially.
This could be implemented through a combination of the repayment of outstanding loans, an injection of new funding into the business, and the purchase of existing shareholders’ interests, they added.
Quintessentially’s founders, including Sir Ben, are thought to be keen to retain an equity interest in the company after any deal.
In January 2022, newspaper reports suggested that Quintessentially had been put up for sale with a valuation of £140m.
Deloitte, the accountancy firm, was charged with finding a buyer at the time but a transaction failed to materialise.
Sir Ben, who was knighted in Mr Johnson’s resignation honours list, turned to one of Quintessentially’s shareholders for financial support during the pandemic.
World Fuel Services, an energy and aviation services company, is owed £15.5m as well as £3.5m in accrued interest, according to one person close to the process.
The loan is said to include a warrant to convert it into equity upon repayment.
Quintessentially does not disclose the number or identities of many of its clients, although it said in annual accounts filed at Companies House in January that it had increased turnover to £29.6m in the year to 30 April 2024.
The accounts suggested the company was seeing growth in demand from clients internationally.
“During the last year, we have not only renewed important corporate contracts like Mastercard, but have also expanded by adding new corporate clients like Swiss4 in the UK, R360 in India, and Visa in the Middle East and South America,” they said.
In its experiences and events division, it won a contract to work with the Red Sea Film Festival and to provide corporate concierge services to the Saudi Premier League.
It added that Allianz, the German insurer, BMW, and South African lender Standard Bank were among other clients with which it had signed contracts.
The accounts included the warning of a “risk that the pace and level at which business returns could be materially less than forecast, requiring the group and company to obtain external funding which may not be forthcoming and therefore this creates material uncertainty that may cast ultimately cast doubt about the … ability to continue as a going concern”.
This weekend, a Quintessentially spokesman declined to comment on the sale process.
Adele, the Grammy award-winning artist, has joined the list of music superstars investing in Audoo, a music technology company which helps artists to receive fairer royalty payments.
Sky News has learnt that the British musician and Adam Clayton, the U2 bassist, have injected money into Audoo as part of a £7m funding round.
The pair join Sir Elton John, Sir Paul McCartney and ABBA’s Bjorn Ulvaeus as shareholders in the company.
Changes to Audoo’s share register were filed at Companies House in recent days.
Audoo, which was established by former musician Ryan Edwards, is trying to address the perennial issue of public performance royalties, in order to ensure musicians are rewarded when their work is played in public venues.
Mr Edwards is reported to have been motivated to set up the company after hearing his own music played at football stadia and in bars, without any payment for it.
Estimates suggest that artists lose out on billions of dollars of unaccounted royalties each year.
More on Adele
Related Topics:
Follow The World
Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday
London-based Audoo uses a monitoring device – which it calls an Audio Meter – to recognise songs played in public venues, and which is said to have a 99% success rate.
It has struck what it describes as industry-first partnerships with organisations including the music licensing company PPL/PRS to track and report songs played in public performance locations such as cafes, hair salons, shops and gyms.
“At Audoo, we’re incredibly proud of the continued support we’re receiving as we work to make music royalties fairer and more transparent for artists and rights-holders around the world through our pioneering technology,” Mr Edwards told Sky News in a statement on Friday.
“We have successfully reached £7m in our latest funding round.
“This funding marks a pivotal moment for Audoo as we focus on our growth in North America and across Europe, bringing us closer to our mission of revolutionising the global royalty landscape.”
Sources said the new capital would be used partly to finance Audoo’s growth in the US.
The latest funding round takes the total amount of money raised by the company since its launch to more than $30m.
Mr Edwards has spoken of his desire to establish a major presence in Europe and the US because of their status as the world’s biggest recorded music markets.
Adele’s management company did not respond to an enquiry from Sky News.
The King’s personal fortune has shot up by £30m to put him on par with Rishi Sunak and his wife Akshata Murty, while the overall number of billionaires in the UK has plummeted, according to The Sunday Times Rich List.
The 2025 list, published on Friday, shows the King’s personal wealth grew from £610m to £640m, taking him up 20 places to 258 – level with former prime minister Mr Sunak and his wife.
The number of overall UK billionaires has fallen to 156 from 165 in 2024, marking the biggest drop since the rich list began 37 years ago.
Gopi Hinduja and his family, behind the Indian conglomerate Hinduja Group, topped the list for the fourth year running with £35.3bn.
Meanwhile, founder and chairman of global chemicals company Ineos Sir Jim Ratcliffe, who became part owner of Manchester United last year, dropped from fourth place to seventh after his reported wealth went from £23.5bn to £17.05bn.
Image: Sir Jim Ratcliffe. Pic: PA.
Sir Jim’s £6.47bn losses marked the biggest on the list, while Russian-born brothers Igor and Dmitry Bukhman, who built a fortune on mobile games such as Gardenscapes and Fishdom, made the biggest gains with nearly £6.2bn.
New entries included makeup mogul Charlotte Tilbury with £350m and Ellen DeGeneres, who left the US for the Cotswolds last year.
Image: Ellen DeGeneres with wife Portia de Rossi at Wimbledon. Pic: Reuters
The Sunday Times said the list was one of its toughest to compile due to Donald Trump’s tariffs and the subsequent stock market turbulence, adding many from previous years had dropped off the list and others were no longer eligible having fled Britain after Labour’s non-dom crackdown.
Overall, the combined wealth of those on the list stood at £772.8bn – down 3% from the last list.
Speaking to Anna Jones on Sky News Breakfast, Rich List compiler Rob Watts highlighted the story of Tom and Phil Beahon, who own sportswear clothing brand Castore which is now worth £1bn, as one of his favourites.
The brothers from Wirral have debuted at joint 345 on the list with an estimated wealth of £350m.
Calling their story “inspiring”, Mr Watts said: “They dreamed of being sportsmen as lads – one of them got onto the books of Tranmere Rovers and the other played cricket for Lancashire, but their sporting careers were over in their early 20s.
“And they say that failure was critical to driving them to create this £1bn sports kit business that you’ll now see being worn by the England cricket team and the England rugby team.”
Image: England cricketer Olly Stone wearing a kit manufactured by Castore. Pic: PA
The top 20:
1. Gopi Hinduja and family – £35.3bn
2. David and Simon Reuben and family – £26.87bn
3. Sir Leonard Blavatnik – £25.73bn
4. Sir James Dyson and family – £20.8bn
5. Idan Ofer – £20.12bn
6. Guy, George, Alannah and Galen Weston and family – £17.75bn
7. Sir Jim Ratcliffe – £17.05bn
8. Lakshmi Mittal and family – £15.44bn
9. John Fredriksen and family – £13.68bn
10. Igor and Dmitry Bukhman – £12.54bn
11. Kirsten and Jorn Rausing – £12.51bn
12. Michael Platt – £12.5bn
13. Charlene de Carvalho-Heineken and Michel de Carvalho – £10.09bn
14. Duke of Westminster and the Grosvenor family – £9.88bn
15. Lord Bamford and family – £9.45bn
16. Denise, John and Peter Coates – £9.44bn
17. Carrie and Francois Perrodo and family – £9.3bn
18. Barnaby and Merlin Swire and family – £9.25bn
19. Marit, Lisbet, Sigrid and Hans Rausing – £9.09bn