Neil Dawson
UTC Legend
I think it boils down to how reliant you are on one channel or media outlet. Or maybe if Holmes is the only one to lose so far it’s based on talent!!
Non - Lineker removed from MOTD
- Thread starter blandford_cherry
- Start date
Druss_the_Legend
UTC Legend
The announcement by the BBC..
“The BBC has decided that he will step back from presenting Match of the Day until we’ve got an agreed and clear position on his use of social media.
“When it comes to leading our football and sports coverage, Gary is second to none. We have never said that Gary should be an opinion free zone, or that he can’t have a view on issues that matter to him, but we have said that he should keep well away from taking sides on party political issues or political controversies.”
Not one mention of IR35 tax situation...are you saying they are deliberately using this as a way of getting back at him? So they are also lying?
RobTrent
UTC Legend
Its not really different. I think you either agree with both doing it or neither.
Saying a film or tactics were good or bad is a bit different from telling the director/coach/PE teacher how they are certain that a different approach is best. No?
DJ
Moderator
I’m saying that they are not on the best of terms already and it’s more than likely had an influence on the situation. As per reports in the media by people who are far more knowledgeable on the situation than I am.
Kudos
UTC Legend
Well he's a "deemed" employee according to his employer the BBC.
I'm pretty sure some people are conflating individuals in direct employment by the BBC, working on programmes run, owned and produced by BBC with ones subcontracting on programmes which are produced, staffed and run by independent companies but are shown on the BBC.
SlowDownDerek
UTC Legend
It's an absolute disgrace that these people get paid millions in a way that they can avoid tax. He's paid way too much as it is. I love the BBC but it is paid for by a regressive tax that disproportionately impacts poor people. Their football coverage doesn't need an expensive star. Just pay up-and-comers peanuts and let them move on if one of the other broadcasters outbids the BBC. Offer lineker £150k on a fully employed basis take it or leave it.
Kenya Cherrie
UTC Legend
Since 2018, the BBC has been involved in a protracted and bitter argument with some of its best-known presenters, including Lineker, over their employment status. Specifically, how they paid their tax.
It stems, it is argued, from the broadcaster’s insistence that they become self-employed. Some presenters, including the former 6 Music presenter Liz Kershaw, say they were forced by the Beeb to become self-employed and to pay their tax through limited companies. She told i the broadcaster did this so it could more easily fire its self-employed presenters.
While the arrangement benefited the BBC and to a degree its top-earning stars, the taxman was not impressed, and BBC stars including Lineker have spent years tied up in legal cases after being pursued with claims by HMRC for tax they say he owes.
Presenters who set up limited companies paid corporation tax, and a dividend tax on their profits, rather than income tax. This saw them pay up to half the amount of tax they would had they been employed directly by the broadcaster.
Lineker’s case will have been going on for years and his fees for employing expensive tax lawyers who charge hundreds of pounds an hour will cost hundreds of thousands of pounds, according to tax experts. HMRC is demanding the presenter pay just under £5m. It is pursuing him under “off-payroll working” rules known as IR35.
Lineker has appealed, and in a hearing last month his lawyer effectively argued that the taxman should not be pursuing Lineker but the BBC.
Many within the tax industry have sympathy with Lineker’s legal argument.
“I don’t think there is any question that HMRC should be going after the BBC rather than Gary Lineker, particularly for one of the years that they are looking at,” said Robert Salter, an employment and payroll tax expert at Blick Rothenberg, the accountancy firm. From 2017, he says, the law was clear that the tax status of employees was the responsibility of the company and not the individual.
Liz Kershaw has told i that while presenters have been left to deal with the tax repercussions of their employment status, “it was the BBC that created the situation”.
She added that while Lineker is very highly paid, other less well remunerated presenters and BBC staff have experienced none of the upsides of being self-employed but also some very distressing downsides. They lost access to benefits, such as sick pay and pension payments, then found themselves hit with huge tax bills by HMRC. She has said it has caused some staff extreme distress after receiving huge tax bills.
“It’s a really sad situation,” said Kershaw. “I have no axe to grind, as when I was told to set up a company in 2018, I refused. I asked an accountant and employment lawyer for advice before this and he said they said it was inappropriate and not to my advantage.”
The depth of upset among BBC stars, as well as how much money was at stake, came to light in 2018. The Times published a letter sent to presenters from former BBC deputy director-general Anne Bulford, apologising for the “hurt and angst” caused by this tax arrangement.
The paper reported that between 2014 and 2018, the broadcaster’s 66 richest stars had put their £74m earnings through these company structures, in a move that could have enabled the avoidance of as much of £20m in tax.
The arrangement landed many staff in hot water with HM Revenue & Customs from 2018, with the taxman arguing they should have been directly employed, and paying more tax.
It stems, it is argued, from the broadcaster’s insistence that they become self-employed. Some presenters, including the former 6 Music presenter Liz Kershaw, say they were forced by the Beeb to become self-employed and to pay their tax through limited companies. She told i the broadcaster did this so it could more easily fire its self-employed presenters.
While the arrangement benefited the BBC and to a degree its top-earning stars, the taxman was not impressed, and BBC stars including Lineker have spent years tied up in legal cases after being pursued with claims by HMRC for tax they say he owes.
Presenters who set up limited companies paid corporation tax, and a dividend tax on their profits, rather than income tax. This saw them pay up to half the amount of tax they would had they been employed directly by the broadcaster.
Lineker’s case will have been going on for years and his fees for employing expensive tax lawyers who charge hundreds of pounds an hour will cost hundreds of thousands of pounds, according to tax experts. HMRC is demanding the presenter pay just under £5m. It is pursuing him under “off-payroll working” rules known as IR35.
Lineker has appealed, and in a hearing last month his lawyer effectively argued that the taxman should not be pursuing Lineker but the BBC.
Many within the tax industry have sympathy with Lineker’s legal argument.
“I don’t think there is any question that HMRC should be going after the BBC rather than Gary Lineker, particularly for one of the years that they are looking at,” said Robert Salter, an employment and payroll tax expert at Blick Rothenberg, the accountancy firm. From 2017, he says, the law was clear that the tax status of employees was the responsibility of the company and not the individual.
Liz Kershaw has told i that while presenters have been left to deal with the tax repercussions of their employment status, “it was the BBC that created the situation”.
She added that while Lineker is very highly paid, other less well remunerated presenters and BBC staff have experienced none of the upsides of being self-employed but also some very distressing downsides. They lost access to benefits, such as sick pay and pension payments, then found themselves hit with huge tax bills by HMRC. She has said it has caused some staff extreme distress after receiving huge tax bills.
“It’s a really sad situation,” said Kershaw. “I have no axe to grind, as when I was told to set up a company in 2018, I refused. I asked an accountant and employment lawyer for advice before this and he said they said it was inappropriate and not to my advantage.”
The depth of upset among BBC stars, as well as how much money was at stake, came to light in 2018. The Times published a letter sent to presenters from former BBC deputy director-general Anne Bulford, apologising for the “hurt and angst” caused by this tax arrangement.
The paper reported that between 2014 and 2018, the broadcaster’s 66 richest stars had put their £74m earnings through these company structures, in a move that could have enabled the avoidance of as much of £20m in tax.
The arrangement landed many staff in hot water with HM Revenue & Customs from 2018, with the taxman arguing they should have been directly employed, and paying more tax.
stanthevan
UTC Legend
Remember his tweets. They seem to have been forgotten.
Tony Scott's shins
New Signing
This has most likely been said before, but I do not have the stamina or patience to wade through 19 pages of people saying whether Gary/the BBC is correct or not.
I thoroughly enjoyed MOTD yesterday evening. No biased commentators, no incompetent pundits, no hyper analysis of tactics, no managers/coaches spouting drivel, just football - great. I watch the program after it has been broadcast and normally fast forward through all non-football bits, so the new version is just as I like it.
Going back to the issue regarding Gary - I do not listen to what he says. Doesn't matter whether that is football or some other topic. I have my own opinions and thoughts and do not need somebody else to tell me what I should believe. Can't understand why anybody would want to 'follow' anybody else on social media - has everybody become sheep.
UTCIAD
I thoroughly enjoyed MOTD yesterday evening. No biased commentators, no incompetent pundits, no hyper analysis of tactics, no managers/coaches spouting drivel, just football - great. I watch the program after it has been broadcast and normally fast forward through all non-football bits, so the new version is just as I like it.
Going back to the issue regarding Gary - I do not listen to what he says. Doesn't matter whether that is football or some other topic. I have my own opinions and thoughts and do not need somebody else to tell me what I should believe. Can't understand why anybody would want to 'follow' anybody else on social media - has everybody become sheep.
UTCIAD
billythekid
UTC Legend
From what I posted further up the thread re salary list and it mentioned Lineker top and Shearer third, but from this from yesterday in a BBC article on their news website, can’t see him going any time soon.
Matter of opinion re second para.
Mr Davie told BBC News on Saturday he was in "listening mode" about how to reform impartiality rules for staff outside of the news operation after a "difficult day".
He left the door open for Lineker to return, describing him as the "best sports broadcaster in the world" and said he wanted to see him back on-air.
RobTrent
UTC Legend
And yet you're on this social media platform telling us what you believe. ;-)
Druss_the_Legend
UTC Legend
DJ
Moderator
Not really Stan, we can discuss two aspects of things without forgetting one or the other. We’re not goldfish.
SlowDownDerek
UTC Legend
I thought that.... "I can't be arsed to read all your tedious opinions on Lineker.... but here's mine"
SlowDownDerek
UTC Legend
I think his salary and who he works for is relevant. It's why Gary Neville doesn't face the same scrutiny.
Tax efficiency starts at the top
Inheritance tax is paid by people who have inherited money or property after the death of another person. People in the UK face a 40 percent tax bill for any assets valued at over £325,000. According to the Sunday Times, the Queen had a net worth of £365million.
But the King is exempt from this tax bill, according to UK Government documents.
"The official residences, the Royal Archives, the Royal Collection of paintings and other works of art and other assets held by the Queen in right of the Crown fall into this category.
"It would clearly be inappropriate for inheritance tax to be paid in respect of such assets."
But the King will also be exempt from the tax when it comes to private assets.
King Charles handed eye-watering inheritance tax break because it would be 'inappropriate' | Royal | News | Express.co.uk
red_house
UTC Legend
Its £500,000 if leaving a property to a child or grandchild. Charles aside , there are several ways Mr and Mrs average can get around Inheritance tax...if they can be bothered. Most can't.
SlowDownDerek
UTC Legend
Not sure why you've quoted me to bring up this weird whataboutery. I've advocated a large increase in inheritance tax and the abolition of the royal family so I'm not sure I'm your target audience tbh.
afcb_rednblack
UTC Legend
