Furlough pay back

[oldypigeonpopper]

17 hours ago, Scully said:

I equally know of a tidy few who didn’t do well….80% of not a lot is basically **** all. 
I know because I supported two of them. 

I’ve been self employed for donkies years, and continued working as self employed, as I was perfectly entitled to, while receiving the grants I was perfectly entitled to. 
As HMRC have all my details and accounts, I’ve no doubt they’ll be letting me know if I’ve received anything I wasn’t entitled to. 

Hello, I am supporting a family member on self employment, until some employment can be found, slightly different aspect as this person suffers from Autism, it's either that or loose their home from lost income, Banks and Mortgage companies take no prisoners, 

[Scully]

3 hours ago, discobob said:

Did you miss where I said 

" perhaps a similar method as the students do with their loans"

They don't repay until a certain of income and those on minimum wage would not be in receipt of the full amount of Furlough - but the employer could still be paying back - because they have benefitted by having staff (not all are going back - I will give you that)f retained who knows the company etc.....

Despite what some folk think - There will be some that will be affected but there are quite a few that benefitted as some have already raised and I know some as well

No, I didn’t miss it at all. I don’t see why they should have to repay it at all. Perhaps you missed the part where I said the decision WASN’T THEIRS! 
No one on furlough was receiving a ‘full amount’, it was 80 % of their wage. The government knew it was either that or the dole. 

I’m also aware of how the loans work for students as both my kids have been through it. A fair amount of that went on lectures they didn’t attend but did online instead,  and accommodation they weren’t living in. 
Perhaps you could think of a method which targets those which abused the system rather than those who genuinely needed it? 

Edited August 9, 2021 by Scully

[Vince Green]

21 hours ago, 8 shot said:

I know of a tidy few that have done very very well from being on furlough, which does sit well with me.

so do i,

but the furlough was paid to the employer AFAIK not the employee

[daveboy]

The latest grant asks you to declare the earnings from 2020 and compare them with 2021 (turnover not profit)

this is the first time they have done this.....previously you just had to say you had been affected.

[KB1]

1 hour ago, Scully said:

No, I didn’t miss it at all. I don’t see why they should have to repay it at all. Perhaps you missed the part where I said the decision WASN’T THEIRS! 
No one on furlough was receiving a ‘full amount’, it was 80 % of their wage. The government knew it was either that or the dole. 

I’m also aware of how the loans work for students as both my kids have been through it. A fair amount of that went on lectures they didn’t attend but did online instead,  and accommodation they weren’t living in. 
Perhaps you could think of a method which targets those which abused the system rather than those who genuinely needed it? 

To many it was less than 80% of their wage, as the 'Wage' was a capped figure, and it was 80% of that maximum figure…….. So, a pittance for those with debts/bills to suit a higher salary…….  Like you say, it wasn't their choice so why single them out🙄

[discobob]

As Scully say's - it was Furlough or the Dole - what does that run at nowadays?? The Dole or what has replaced it nowadays (Universal Credit I believe) - If it was me I would be thankful to be getting something more than that though (furlough) and I believe I would have no issue in repaying towards the amount of debt - but I would believe that the company should still pay towards it as well - I have a job and the company has someone who knows the business.... And the furlough limit would be nowhere near my take home salary. Would I have found it hard - yes - as my wife is self employed and didn't have any income for several months and was entitled to jack..... 

Would I have gone and got something else during the time - yes - even if it was takeaway delivery. I, however have worked every day throughout. As I implied earlier "I believe I would have no issue" - who knows though - it is hypothetical.

What happened to a load of self employed was terrible - how they were discarded (3 million apparently) with little or no support and 3 years ago that would have been me as well...

And what was raided about paying for Uni and accommodation was absolutely terrible - but this is what happens when Uni's become businesses ....

I have said this from the start and I still believe in it - would every penny get repaid by the people - no - and that is where the slack would be taken up in taxation etc... Whereas now all of it will be taken up by taxation

And if it was done along the lines of student loans...... very few will ever be repaid in full..

 

[Newbie to this]

On 09/08/2021 at 19:22, discobob said:

Would I have gone and got something else during the time - yes - even if it was takeaway delivery

Without furlough and people still having some form of disposable income because of it, I doubt there would have been many takeaway deliveries or a lot of other things.

But then again without furlough, I don't think lockdown would have been possible at all.

Edited August 10, 2021 by Newbie to this

[mel b3]

The company that my lad worked for , wouldn't furlough the staff , they just put them on short time(3 days a week) , my lad was getting 60% wages , which was about the same as dole money.

The company that my daughter worked for , just locked the door , and none of the staff got a single penny from anywhere. 

It was a rather expensive time for me , but on the upside , it pushed them both into getting decent jobs. My daughter now has a decent job working for the job centre , and my lad is now earning almost three times more than he was earning in his last job.

We all know winners and losers from the covid mess , I just hope the ones that deliberately fleeced the state , get to pay some back.

Edited August 9, 2021 by mel b3

[discobob]

4 minutes ago, mel b3 said:

I just hope the ones that deliberately fleeced the state , get to pay some back.

agreed 

[Gordon R]

I am told that the local car wash did quite well from the Furlough Scheme. All 500 employees got the 80%.

[mel b3]

2 hours ago, Gordon R said:

I am told that the local car wash did quite well from the Furlough Scheme. All 500 employees got the 80%.

Many a true word ,said in jest .

[Gordon R]

I wish it was in jest.

[Charliedog]

I worked my nuts off through covid but what really winds me up is my colleages who sat at home on Furlough and have now returned to work are getting extra days holiday that they somehow missed out on sitting at home.

 

[holloway]

On 08/08/2021 at 18:13, scolopax said:

Has there been any announcement about how the government  proposes those who received furlough payments will pay it back ? 

You don't pay back grants,they were a necessity to most with a few exceptions of course .

[holloway]

9 minutes ago, Charliedog said:

I worked my nuts off through covid but what really winds me up is my colleages who sat at home on Furlough and have now returned to work are getting extra days holiday that they somehow missed out on sitting at home.

 

Then you were very lucky to have been able to carry on working then weren't you ?I was lucky enough to be able to continue as normal although did lose money I just felt really sorry for the poor **** who were basically locked in on 80 %of there money  if that was me I would have really struggled I was very lucky ,I am sorry you can't see it the same way.

[Jim Neal]

Bit of a touchy subject this one

I see it from different angles.

One thing I think a lot of people don't account for is that whilst many people were being paid 80% of their salaries to stay at home, their overheads were a lot lower mainly due to not having to travel to work, buy their lunch, buy work clothes, etc etc.... it wouldn't exactly have evened out in the end I'm sure, but the 20% "gap" would have been significantly less in real terms.

You have to also add to that the fact we weren't allowed in pubs etc, so peoples' spending on their social lives virtually stopped.

I know quite a few people who probably spend a lot more than 20% of their pay packet down the pub.

People working from home also were eligible to claim a tax rebate - even if they only worked from home for ONE day out of all of it!  A lot of people who spent most of the covid period on furlough, but did maybe a few days from home, will have claimed the rebate.

Let's not forget mortgage repayment holidays.  Obviously with a repayment holiday, the capital amount remains static and thus the amount of interest repaid increases once payments recommence, but I think just that one form of financial relief saved a lot of peoples' bacon.  And let's be honest, is most peoples' mortgage only 20% of their salary?  I think not, it'll be much bigger in most cases.  And I think that may be the reason why you couldn't buy a bag of cement, a paving slab, brick, barbecue, or fence panel for weeks on end.  More disposable income at peoples' fingertips.  Generally, employed folks did OK out of furlough.

I'm self-employed.  My business was seriously affected because I work mostly in peoples' homes (but, bizarrely, my most typical customer through all the worst time of covid was the over 65s age group!  The kind of people who just say "nuts to this, I'm getting on with what's left of my life").

In the beginning, I voluntarily stopped going out to work because I was, as we all were, completely clueless about exactly how serious covid was and how bad it would get in the forthcoming weeks - so I "did my duty".  My SEISS grants were not to be sniffed at, but in no way replaced my usual expected turnover.  As it turned out, the first of the three tax years that grants 1-3 were based on was an anomaly for me, where I actually reported a net loss.  Then for grant 4, they moved the goalposts to include my most up-to-date tax return which was the year I bought a new van outright and had a load of other associated expenses, and thus only reported a small net profit.  So I was out of luck all ways around!

I've yet to work out the maths, but the method of calculation for the current and final grant may well give me a fairer figure, and I'll darn well take it.  My business has literally only just recovered to pre-covid levels.

To those who venomously decree that self-employed people somehow don't deserve the government support offered, and should pay it back, I have a very short sentence for you that begins with "go" and ends in "yourself".

Rishi Sunak and his underlings are not stupid.  They knew darn well that even though some self-employed folks may take the mickey, there would be a lot more who wouldn't receive anywhere near what they could really do with in order to make ends meet.  Almost exactly to the pound, my SEISS was equivalent to my usual monthly mortgage payment, which I deferred so I could put food on the table instead.

It's unfortunate that some people in some situations have slipped through the net and don't fall into any category that is eligible for support.  I honestly think HMRC have made as much effort as they can to minimise it happening.  However, there are some people who have been victims of their own making, e.g. hair dressers, window cleaners, people who work for cash and make nothing "on paper" and therefore have had no taxable turnover from which to claim their SEISS.  I also know of several people who've set themselves up as a Ltd company taking dividends rather than salary, and therefore their previous years of "tax efficiency" have meant they're pretty much cut off from any covid help via the chancellor.  You make your bed and you lay in it.  They're probably still in a state of net gain.

Let's hope we don't have to experience this cluster***k ever again, eh?

(what film was that from?)

Edited August 10, 2021 by Jim Neal

[TIGHTCHOKE]

Well written Jim

Heartbreak Ridge.

[mel b3]

6 hours ago, Jim Neal said:

Bit of a touchy subject this one

I see it from different angles.

One thing I think a lot of people don't account for is that whilst many people were being paid 80% of their salaries to stay at home, their overheads were a lot lower mainly due to not having to travel to work, buy their lunch, buy work clothes, etc etc.... it wouldn't exactly have evened out in the end I'm sure, but the 20% "gap" would have been significantly less in real terms.

You have to also add to that the fact we weren't allowed in pubs etc, so peoples' spending on their social lives virtually stopped.

I know quite a few people who probably spend a lot more than 20% of their pay packet down the pub.

People working from home also were eligible to claim a tax rebate - even if they only worked from home for ONE day out of all of it!  A lot of people who spent most of the covid period on furlough, but did maybe a few days from home, will have claimed the rebate.

Let's not forget mortgage repayment holidays.  Obviously with a repayment holiday, the capital amount remains static and thus the amount of interest repaid increases once payments recommence, but I think just that one form of financial relief saved a lot of peoples' bacon.  And let's be honest, is most peoples' mortgage only 20% of their salary?  I think not, it'll be much bigger in most cases.  And I think that may be the reason why you couldn't buy a bag of cement, a paving slab, brick, barbecue, or fence panel for weeks on end.  More disposable income at peoples' fingertips.  Generally, employed folks did OK out of furlough.

I'm self-employed.  My business was seriously affected because I work mostly in peoples' homes (but, bizarrely, my most typical customer through all the worst time of covid was the over 65s age group!  The kind of people who just say "nuts to this, I'm getting on with what's left of my life").

In the beginning, I voluntarily stopped going out to work because I was, as we all were, completely clueless about exactly how serious covid was and how bad it would get in the forthcoming weeks - so I "did my duty".  My SEISS grants were not to be sniffed at, but in no way replaced my usual expected turnover.  As it turned out, the first of the three tax years that grants 1-3 were based on was an anomaly for me, where I actually reported a net loss.  Then for grant 4, they moved the goalposts to include my most up-to-date tax return which was the year I bought a new van outright and had a load of other associated expenses, and thus only reported a small net profit.  So I was out of luck all ways around!

I've yet to work out the maths, but the method of calculation for the current and final grant may well give me a fairer figure, and I'll darn well take it.  My business has literally only just recovered to pre-covid levels.

To those who venomously decree that self-employed people somehow don't deserve the government support offered, and should pay it back, I have a very short sentence for you that begins with "go" and ends in "yourself".

Rishi Sunak and his underlings are not stupid.  They knew darn well that even though some self-employed folks may take the mickey, there would be a lot more who wouldn't receive anywhere near what they could really do with in order to make ends meet.  Almost exactly to the pound, my SEISS was equivalent to my usual monthly mortgage payment, which I deferred so I could put food on the table instead.

It's unfortunate that some people in some situations have slipped through the net and don't fall into any category that is eligible for support.  I honestly think HMRC have made as much effort as they can to minimise it happening.  However, there are some people who have been victims of their own making, e.g. hair dressers, window cleaners, people who work for cash and make nothing "on paper" and therefore have had no taxable turnover from which to claim their SEISS.  I also know of several people who've set themselves up as a Ltd company taking dividends rather than salary, and therefore their previous years of "tax efficiency" have meant they're pretty much cut off from any covid help via the chancellor.  You make your bed and you lay in it.  They're probably still in a state of net gain.

Let's hope we don't have to experience this cluster***k ever again, eh?

(what film was that from?)

That's a pretty fair assessment of the whole situation 👍.

[Scully]

9 hours ago, Charliedog said:

I worked my nuts off through covid but what really winds me up is my colleages who sat at home on Furlough and have now returned to work are getting extra days holiday that they somehow missed out on sitting at home.

 

Being furloughed at home wasn’t a holiday, as some seem to think. No one could go anywhere for a start, we were in lockdown. 
 

[Scully]

8 hours ago, Jim Neal said:

Bit of a touchy subject this one

I see it from different angles.

One thing I think a lot of people don't account for is that whilst many people were being paid 80% of their salaries to stay at home, their overheads were a lot lower mainly due to not having to travel to work, buy their lunch, buy work clothes, etc etc.... it wouldn't exactly have evened out in the end I'm sure, but the 20% "gap" would have been significantly less in real terms.

You have to also add to that the fact we weren't allowed in pubs etc, so peoples' spending on their social lives virtually stopped.

I know quite a few people who probably spend a lot more than 20% of their pay packet down the pub.

People working from home also were eligible to claim a tax rebate - even if they only worked from home for ONE day out of all of it!  A lot of people who spent most of the covid period on furlough, but did maybe a few days from home, will have claimed the rebate.

Let's not forget mortgage repayment holidays.  Obviously with a repayment holiday, the capital amount remains static and thus the amount of interest repaid increases once payments recommence, but I think just that one form of financial relief saved a lot of peoples' bacon.  And let's be honest, is most peoples' mortgage only 20% of their salary?  I think not, it'll be much bigger in most cases.  And I think that may be the reason why you couldn't buy a bag of cement, a paving slab, brick, barbecue, or fence panel for weeks on end.  More disposable income at peoples' fingertips.  Generally, employed folks did OK out of furlough.

I'm self-employed.  My business was seriously affected because I work mostly in peoples' homes (but, bizarrely, my most typical customer through all the worst time of covid was the over 65s age group!  The kind of people who just say "nuts to this, I'm getting on with what's left of my life").

In the beginning, I voluntarily stopped going out to work because I was, as we all were, completely clueless about exactly how serious covid was and how bad it would get in the forthcoming weeks - so I "did my duty".  My SEISS grants were not to be sniffed at, but in no way replaced my usual expected turnover.  As it turned out, the first of the three tax years that grants 1-3 were based on was an anomaly for me, where I actually reported a net loss.  Then for grant 4, they moved the goalposts to include my most up-to-date tax return which was the year I bought a new van outright and had a load of other associated expenses, and thus only reported a small net profit.  So I was out of luck all ways around!

I've yet to work out the maths, but the method of calculation for the current and final grant may well give me a fairer figure, and I'll darn well take it.  My business has literally only just recovered to pre-covid levels.

To those who venomously decree that self-employed people somehow don't deserve the government support offered, and should pay it back, I have a very short sentence for you that begins with "go" and ends in "yourself".

Rishi Sunak and his underlings are not stupid.  They knew darn well that even though some self-employed folks may take the mickey, there would be a lot more who wouldn't receive anywhere near what they could really do with in order to make ends meet.  Almost exactly to the pound, my SEISS was equivalent to my usual monthly mortgage payment, which I deferred so I could put food on the table instead.

It's unfortunate that some people in some situations have slipped through the net and don't fall into any category that is eligible for support.  I honestly think HMRC have made as much effort as they can to minimise it happening.  However, there are some people who have been victims of their own making, e.g. hair dressers, window cleaners, people who work for cash and make nothing "on paper" and therefore have had no taxable turnover from which to claim their SEISS.  I also know of several people who've set themselves up as a Ltd company taking dividends rather than salary, and therefore their previous years of "tax efficiency" have meant they're pretty much cut off from any covid help via the chancellor.  You make your bed and you lay in it.  They're probably still in a state of net gain.

Let's hope we don't have to experience this cluster***k ever again, eh?

(what film was that from?)

Household bills increased because those furloughed were at home all day; kids who were off school also use electricity, as do the parents forced to stay off work to look after them. It doesn’t help that your income is less. 
My OH didn’t have to travel to work admittedly, but neither of us buy lunch, we make our own before leaving the house, and I’m the only one who has to buy work clothes. 
I am also self employed, and claimed the first two grants, but haven’t bothered with the last two even though my accountant tells me I am eligible. This doesn’t mean I’m earning loads, I just literally can’t be bothered to go through the hassle of having to prove my business has been effected. 
I took a couple of weeks off right at the beginning as I was t sure where I stood regards carrying on working, but also found most folk just wanted to carry on as normal, no one seemed concerned at all about me being in their house. 
Personally, I would have been as happy as a pig in poop being furloughed, sitting in my studio all day painting is my idea of bliss. 🙂

[mel b3]

8 hours ago, Scully said:

Being furloughed at home wasn’t a holiday, as some seem to think. No one could go anywhere for a start, we were in lockdown. 
 

The young couple that live next door to me had a fine old time . They were sitting  in the garden by 10 am every morning, and the first bottle of red was open by 11 am , and they'd sit there drinking until it was dark .   Both of them were having their wages topped up to 100% by their company. 

Sadly , being together 24/7 took its toll on their relationship,  and he left (with his belongings following him out of the window ) following a rather public row over a rustler burger 😅😅😅.

 

Edited to add.

If my Mrs ever gave me a rustler burger , id leave as well 😅.

Edited August 11, 2021 by mel b3

[MirokuMK70]

1 hour ago, mel b3 said:

following a rather public row over a rustler burger

Is that a euphemism?

[Mice!]

1 hour ago, mel b3 said:

Edited to add.

If my Mrs ever gave me a rustler burger , id leave as well

Careful Mel, if she reads this she'll be popping the shops.

[mel b3]

29 minutes ago, MirokuMK70 said:

Is that a euphemism?

If only it were . It's this stuff that comes in a plastic tub , with a picture of a burger on the front , you just microwave it for two minutes , and you have stuff , that's hot.

17 minutes ago, Mice! said:

Careful Mel, if she reads this she'll be popping the shops.

We've both witnessed a rustler burger in the flesh (mush),  we're in complete agreement that no relationship could ever withstand such a thing.

[Jim Neal]

22 hours ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

Well written Jim

Heartbreak Ridge.

Thanks Dave, and thanks, it was bugging me!!  I love a good Clint film!

14 hours ago, Scully said:

Household bills increased because those furloughed were at home all day; kids who were off school also use electricity, as do the parents forced to stay off work to look after them. It doesn’t help that your income is less. 
My OH didn’t have to travel to work admittedly, but neither of us buy lunch, we make our own before leaving the house, and I’m the only one who has to buy work clothes. 
I am also self employed, and claimed the first two grants, but haven’t bothered with the last two even though my accountant tells me I am eligible. This doesn’t mean I’m earning loads, I just literally can’t be bothered to go through the hassle of having to prove my business has been effected. 
I took a couple of weeks off right at the beginning as I was t sure where I stood regards carrying on working, but also found most folk just wanted to carry on as normal, no one seemed concerned at all about me being in their house. 
Personally, I would have been as happy as a pig in poop being furloughed, sitting in my studio all day painting is my idea of bliss. 🙂

Of course you're right, more people in the home for longer inevitably means more electricity used.  But unless it's really time you switched supplier, that's only a modest increase in overheads.  The cost of travelling is way more for your typical household or individual - cars sat on driveways for months barely going anywhere!  Taking all the other savings into account, the 20% gap was not, in reality, as big as that for many people.  Granted, there's always exceptions.

You've missed a trick with grants 3 and 4 then, you could have claimed them, there was no need to do any "homework" to supply proof, you just had to tick the box to declare you felt your business had been affected.  Obviously you needed to be sure you wouldn't get your bum spanked at a later date if it turns out you didn't need it after HMRC investigate you, but that's different from can't be bothered to prove it

What's your trade?  I run a carpet & upholstery cleaning business so I'm also working in peoples' homes - I found it different, basically my customers decided my fate, the phone never rang from late March throughout the whole of April.

Likewise I'd have been happy to have been furloughed if I was employed!  I had a release pen to extend, water system to re-plumb, feeders to repair, rides to cut... an endless list I could have got through!