Jump to content

Recommended Posts

My understanding is that most nannies are employed because they do not meet the criteria for being self employed. I have reporoduced HMRC's guidance on the subject below. If a nanny claims to be self employed you will need to be very careful because the deemed employer of the nanny will be liable for tax and national insurance if an investigation takes place. It is possible that a nanny may be granted self employment status by HMRC but that is on a role by role basis and does not automatically transfer to new roles.



FRom HMRC......


Employed or self-employed?

In order to answer this question it is necessary to determine whether the person works under a contract of service (employees) or under a contract for services (self-employed, independent contractor). For tax and NICs purposes, there is no statutory definition of a contract of service or of a contract for services. What the parties call their relationship, or what they consider it to be, is not conclusive. It is the reality of the relationship that matters.


In order to determine the nature of a contract, it is necessary to apply common law principles. The courts have, over the years, laid down some factors and tests that are relevant, which is included in the overview below.


As a general guide as to whether a worker is an employee or self-employed; if the answer is 'Yes' to all of the following questions, then the worker is probably an employee:


Do they have to do the work themselves?

Can someone tell them at any time what to do, where to carry out the work or when and how to do it?

Can they work a set amount of hours?

Can someone move them from task to task?

Are they paid by the hour, week, or month?

Can they get overtime pay or bonus payment?



If the answer is 'Yes' to all of the following questions, it will usually mean that the worker is self-employed:


Can they hire someone to do the work or engage helpers at their own expense?

Do they risk their own money?

Do they provide the main items of equipment they need to do their job, not just the small tools that many employees provide for themselves?

Do they agree to do a job for a fixed price regardless of how long the job may take?

Can they decide what work to do, how and when to do the work and where to provide the services?

Do they regularly work for a number of different people?

Do they have to correct unsatisfactory work in their own time and at their own expense?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The fact everyone has had a CCTV camera in their pockets for the last 15+ years has done a huge amount to prevent and mitigate random drunken violence.  Thugs can't get away with what they used to anymore.
    • Do you mean that there are only very few trades people and that all of their thousands of happy customers post glowing reviews but most of them have only ever posted once to recommend said trade person on the trade person's own thread?   If so, I agree it's mysterious.  
    • Oh now you're coming over all defensive. What happened to the nice Sue, because since the early part of the year your approach seems to have changed and you've become much more challenging. No you have not broken any rules and even if you had why would I involve Admin, that's a ludicrous thing to say.  Take care Sue. 
    • I was the opposite of you. I never felt particularly happy around Brixton late at night - I didn't know it that well. Do you remember the name of the late- night Irish pub opposite the railway arches near the BR station? Was it Mulligan's? Brannigan's? To be fair, until the East London Line extension, Rye Lane walking south wasn't a favourite of mine after dark either. The only pub left on there was The Hope, which was in the other direction. It felt very bleak. I think that makes a huge difference. When The Gowlett was boarded up, Amott Road felt very different. It's like a beacon now. Pub violence does seem to have had its day in inner London. Maybe it's a result of the disappearance of pool tables, flat-roofed pubs and cheap Stella offers. I bet you could still find a Saturday night kick-up in New Addington or the  Becontree estate in Dagenham. Definitely. Pubs next to stations, kebab shops and ironically named nightclubs are all to be avoided in smaller places. The weirdest place I've ever had random trouble was in a club in St. Ives in Cambridgeshire.  I think it was called 'Options'. It was the only club there.  See also 'Jekylls' nightclub in Hyde, Manchester - a truly dreadful place where getting thrown out for fighting was infinitely preferable to spending the evening in there and coming out stinking of stale chip fat. I took a kicking in 'Kingsway Kebabs' in Swansea after a night in 'The Aviary' (so named because it was 'full of birds') nightclub. But that wasn't so random. It was a local girl, who gave me a leathering because I'd run off for a large chicken doner, rather than dance with her to 'Criticize' by Alexander O'Neal. Sorry, Sue, I've digressed a little.  To answer your question, I think London feels relatively safe overall.  
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...