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
A health and beauty retailer founded on a Lancashire market stall more than half a century ago is facing collapse amid a race to find a rescue deal.
Sky News has learnt that Bodycare, which employs about 1,500 people, could fall into administration as soon as next week unless a buyer is found.
City sources said that Interpath, the advisory firm which has been working with Bodycare and its owners for several months, was continuing to explore options for the business.
The company is owned by Baaj Capital, a family office run by Jas Singh.
Its other investments have included In The Style, which underwent a pre-pack administration earlier this year, and party products supplier Amscan International.
Baaj also attempted to take over The Original Factory Shop earlier this year before its offer was trumped by Modella Capital, another specialist retail investor.
More from Money
News of Bodycare’s travails comes just weeks after the retailer secured a £7m debt facility to buy it short-term breathing space.
The facility was secured against Bodycare’s retail inventory, according to a statement last month.
Bodycare was established by Graham and Margaret Blackledge in Skelmersdale in 1970, and sells branded products made by the likes of L’Oreal, Nivea and Elizabeth Arden.
The chain was profitable before the pandemic, but like many retailers lost millions of pounds in the financial years immediately after it hit.
Bodycare received financial support from the taxpayer in the form of a multimillion pound loan issued under one of the Treasury’s pandemic funding schemes.
The chain is run by retail veteran Tony Brown, who held senior roles at BHS and Beales, the now-defunct department store groups.
If Bodycare does fall into insolvency proceedings, it would be the latest high street chain to face collapse this year, amid intensifying complaints from the industry about tax increases announced in last autumn’s budget.
In recent weeks, River Island narrowly avoided administration after winning creditor approval for a restructuring involving store closures and job losses.
Later this week, the struggling discount giant Poundland will seek similar approval from the courts for a radical overhaul that will entail dozens of shop closures.
Bodycare could not be reached for comment on Tuesday, while Baaj has been contacted for comment and Interpath declined to comment.
President Trump says he is firing a governor of the US central bank, a move seen as intensifying his bid for control over the setting of interest rates.
He posted a letter on his Truth Social platform on Monday night declaring that Lisa Cook – the first black woman to be appointed a Federal Reserve governor – was to be removed from her post on alleged mortgage fraud grounds.
She has responded, insisting he has no authority over her job and vowed to continue in the role, threatening a legal battle that could potentially go all the way to the Supreme Court.
The president‘s threat is significant as he has consistently demanded that the central bank cut interest rates to help boost the US economy. Growth has sagged since he returned to office on the back of US trade war gloom and hiring has slowed sharply in more recent months.
Mr Trump has previously directed his ire over rates at Jay Powell, the chair of the Federal Reserve, blaming him for the economic jitters and has repeatedly called for him to be fired.
The Fed, as it is known, has long been considered an institution independent from politics and question marks over that independence has previously shaken financial markets.
More from Money
The dollar was hit overnight while US futures indicate a negative opening for stock markets.
Mr Powell’s term is due to end next spring and the president is expected to soon nominate his replacement.
Image: Fed chair Jay Powell is seen in discussion with board member Lisa Cook. Pic: AP
The Fed has 12 people with a right to vote on monetary policy, which includes the setting of interest rates and some regulatory powers.
Those 12 include the seven members of the Board of Governors, of which Ms Cook is one.
Replacing her would give Trump appointees a 4-3 majority on the board.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:18
July: Fed chair has ‘done a bad job’, says Trump
He has previously said he would only appoint Fed officials who support lower borrowing costs.
Ms Cook was appointed to the Fed’s board by then-president Joe Biden in 2022 and is the first black woman to serve as a governor.
Her nomination was opposed by most Senate Republicans at the time and was only approved, on a 50-50 vote, with the tie broken by then-vice president Kamala Harris.
It was alleged last week by a Trump appointed regulator that Ms Cook had claimed two primary residences in 2021 to get better mortgage terms.
Mortgage rates are often higher on second homes or those purchased to rent.
She responded to the president’s letter: “President Trump purported to fire me ‘for cause’ when no cause exists under the law, and he has no authority to do so,” she said in an emailed statement.
“I will not resign.”
Legal experts said it was for the White House to argue its case.
But Lev Menand, a law professor at Columbia law school, said of the situation: “This is a procedurally invalid removal under the statute.
“This is not someone convicted of a crime. This is not someone who is not carrying out their duties.”
The Fed was yet to comment.
It has held off from interest rate cuts this year, largely over fears that the president’s trade war will result in a surge of inflation due to higher import duties being passed on in the world’s largest economy.
However, Mr Powell hinted last week that a cut could now be justified due to risks of rising unemployment.
The owners of New Look, the high street fashion retailer, have picked bankers to oversee a strategic review which is expected to see the company change hands next year.
Sky News has learnt that Rothschild has been appointed in recent days to advise New Look and its shareholders on a potential exit.
The investment bank’s appointment follows a number of unsolicited approaches for the business from unidentified suitors.
New Look, which trades from almost 340 stores and employs about 10,000 people across the UK, is the country’s second-largest womenswear retailer in the 18-to-44 year-old age group.
It has been owned by its current shareholders – Alcentra and Brait – since October 2020.
In April, Sky News reported that the investors were injecting £30m of fresh equity into the business to aid its digital transformation.
Last year, the chain reported sales of £769m, with an improvement in gross margins and a statutory loss before tax of £21.7m – down from £88m the previous year.
More from Money
Like most high street retailers, it endured a torrid Covid-19 and engaged in a formal financial restructuring through a company voluntary arrangement.
In the autumn of 2023, it completed a £100m refinancing deal with Blazehill Capital and Wells Fargo.
A spokesperson for New Look declined to comment specifically on the appointment of Rothschild, but said: “Management are focused on running the business and executing the strategy for long-term growth.
“The company is performing well, with strong momentum driven by a successful summer trading period and notable online market share gains.”
Roughly 40% of New Look’s sales are now generated through digital channels, while recent data from the market intelligence firm Kantar showed it had moved into second place in the online 18-44 category, overtaking Shein and ASOS.