[NWH]

I just wanted to be the 100th reply on this thread LOL.

[colley614]

Post 101

[williamx]

If I delete 2 of my posts then I will be number 100 

[Sir Squeaky]

Thread locked.

Oh, hang on... I'm not a mod.

[Village Gleam]

The digs keep it interesting and you get to the nubb of the argument faster.

Your original post was quite combustable as mentioned by others but you have stood your ground and given straightforward replies. My view is that people like you, williamx, colley, shiner,nwh (and probably that bloke who had the rant about trad)would make it in any business by dint of persistence and hard work.

But I also think that if you stick around you are going to have to get your hands dirty.

[Village Gleam]

Anyway Davo I'd like you to quote for a decorating job

[Captain Scarlet]

Did you know the cleaners of the sydney opera house still use squeegees, infact they use wagtails on poles, Luke

[mark dew]

davo, fair play for hanging in there your figures do seem ok. But like williamx says, your figures do seem to be ok on the basis of you working it as a sole trader. Your expenses are almost identical to mine, infact a little more so you have some scope there.
Though you have missed out employers liability (i was quoted £1184 last year) and the other expenses of having an employee, unless you have a way around that which others like me don't know about. Unless its cash in hand for you.
You have nothing to lose really as you have an income independant of window cleaning, so what the hell, why not go for it?
I dunno why people have got upset with your original post? Because other people on here have posted about taking work off other window cleaners and apart from the taboo of undercutting to get it, the general consensus seems to be that is business.
It's hard to run any business where you don't know the ins an outs of the service but you do seem to have put alot of research into this. Although i do agree that you will need to get your hands dirty. I hope you keep posting on your progress as it's very bold to go straight into it as an employer.
But who dares wins and all that.

[NWH]

It`s not that we all got the ump with him personally it was the way he came across with ideas about different things to do with our business when he hasn`t even picked up a squeegee.

[mark dew]

It`s not that we all got the ump with him personally it was the way he came across with ideas about different things to do with our business when he hasn`t even picked up a squeegee.

yeah, i agree with you but it's good when things get stirred up a bit.

[Davo]

.
Though you have missed out employers liability (i was quoted £1184 last year) and the other expenses of having an employee, unless you have a way around that which others like me don't know about.

I think I may have a way round this problem, it probably wouldnt work for many on here , but Im very flexible in my approach. However I will definately NOT be employing anybody.
I dont need that headache.




Mark

[Ian_Giles]

.
Though you have missed out employers liability (i was quoted £1184 last year) and the other expenses of having an employee, unless you have a way around that which others like me don't know about.

I think I may have a way round this problem, it probably wouldnt work for many on here , but Im very flexible in my approach. However I will definately NOT be employing anybody.
I dont need that headache.

Mark, but aren't you 'subbing' the work out?
This is a road you can only travel down a little way before technically you have to employ properly.
I would be interested to see what you view as your way around this problem, I'd also be interested to know if you think the tax man will agree with you?

I got away with employing on a self employed basis for donkey's years, but I've not 'employed' for years now...it's a bloody big risk if something goes wrong...

Ian

[Russell Macdonald]

The only way round this is to rent them the round, i looked into this as i was in a position a few months back. That was what i was told by IR.

[Davo]

The only way round this is to rent them the round, i looked into this as i was in a position a few months back. That was what i was told by IR.

And what conclusion did you come to with regard to renting out your work??


Mark

[Russell Macdonald]

I didn't. I didn't want to take on all the grief of employing someone.

It's a shame the goverment see it as a way of increasing the tax take because i would have
gone for it. The thought that i would still have to pay out because they feel a little unwell &
all the bennifits i would have to pay was not for me.

Macc

[windowwashers]

.
Though you have missed out employers liability (i was quoted £1184 last year) and the other expenses of having an employee, unless you have a way around that which others like me don't know about.

I think I may have a way round this problem, it probably wouldnt work for many on here , but Im very flexible in my approach. However I will definately NOT be employing anybody.
I dont need that headache.




Mark

If a pesron cleans your work more than a certain % than they are classed as employed this guy is already employed by someone else so hes going to get hammered I think 40% tax on second income (does he know this ), I had to take on my guys has its problems and benifits 

[Davo]

this guy is already employed by someone else so hes going to get hammered I think 40% tax on second income (does he know this ), I had to take on my guys has its problems and benifits
 

I dont understand this Ian.

"If a pesron cleans your work more than a certain % than they are classed as employed "
Where did you find this information please.

Your second point regarding tax @ 40% what does this relate to? Tax payable on a second income?
If so I think you may be mistaken , unless of course his taxable income is over the current (2006-2007) £33,000 (after allowancwes).  Otherwise  he will pay basic rate tax of 22% (after allowances).

Mark

[Skyglide]

If you have someone doing your work and it's more than 60% of their total work you have to employ them. Also if you have a self employed person working for you and they don't keep their own tax affairs in order you will be liable.
There is no way round the system if you want to sleep at night.
Chris

[Davo]

If you have someone doing your work and it's more than 60% of their total work you have to employ them. Also if you have a self employed person working for you and they don't keep their own tax affairs in order you will be liable.
There is no way round the system if you want to sleep at night.
Chris

I think you may be mistaken here but I will find out because there will definately be a way arround this. Otherwise there would be no agents for insurance companies etc etc.

Thanks for the info though

Mark

[Russell Macdonald]

I think you might find it's an avarage of 16hrs per week you have to
put them on the cards & not self employed.