Furlough scheme: has employers’ NI been overclaimed?
The Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales (ICAEW) has issued new guidance that describes two scenarios where employers using the furlough scheme may have inadvertently reclaimed secondary Class 1 NI twice when the scheme was first introduced. What’s the full story?
The Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme (CJRS) is complex, but broadly employers pay a percentage of an employee's regular salary (at least 80% in 2020), subject to a cap, then reclaim the 80% element from HMRC. However, it also allows secondary Class 2 NI contributions to be reclaimed, as well as pension contributions under auto-enrolment. This has led to some scenarios where employers who claim the employment allowance (EA) of up to £4,000 per year inadvertently receiving furlough payments in respect of NI that is also relieved under the EA. The ICAEW has published detailed commentary on where this may have happened. In brief, an overclaim may occur where:
- EA claims were deferred until after the final claim month for the CJRS where the £4,000 was not absorbed in full during 2020/21; or
- EA claims were made at the beginning of the tax year where the full £4,000 was absorbed before July 2020.
Potentially affected business should carefully read the guidance and contact HMRC’s Employer Helpline on 0300 200 3200 if they think there is an issue.
Related Topics
-
Delay salary to save tax
As a company owner manager, you decide when to take income from your business. If that’s your only source of income, tax planning is relatively simple but it’s trickier if you have other sources. What’s the best strategy to improve tax efficiency?
-
Loan written off: are you in HMRC’s crosshairs?
HMRC is writing to directors that took a loan from their company that was later written off or released. What should you do if you receive a letter?
-
Cutting the cost of a company car
You want to help your young son replace the ancient car he currently drives. The plan is for your company to buy it but for the running costs to be met by your son. That’s fine with him but is there a more tax and cost-effective alternative?