Furloughing
#11
So do you think the better approach would have been for all of the employers to make redundancies and all of the associated redundancy payments that went with that? That seems to be a very good way of putting a lot of businesses into administration very quickly.
Reply
#12
(05-13-2020, 08:49 AM)baggy1 Wrote: So do you think the better approach would have been for all of the employers to make redundancies and all of the associated redundancy payments that went with that? That seems to be a very good way of putting a lot of businesses into administration very quickly.

Wait for all the pre packs. There will be thousands. Wait for all the liabilities these firms walk away from - it will be £billions.

Watch what Jon Moulton is doing right now with Spicers / Office Team. It'll be the model for many.
Reply
#13
I've no doubt there are a number of firms that will be taking advantage and doing just that, but this is something that had to applied to avoid all companies having to make redundancies. There will always be fraud and those taking advantage, but that was obviously weighed up against the cost to all business and furlough chosen.

What do you think would be more damaging, some headline misuse of the scheme or every business that needs to furlough in the UK having to make redundancies and the cost to them involved in that?
Reply
#14
Maybe a backroom check on their finances if they was fucked there is no point in keeping it afloat .that's the harsh reality of it.
Reply
#15
Proth is already complaining about the administration involved with this scheme, I don't think he is keen on HMRC having to complete credit checks on each of the companies receiving furlough. There will be misuse of the scheme but ultimately that misuse will go directly to the employee, where companies carry on taking furlough payments once they are also earning revenue will be the big risk (for both the HMRC in a risk of fraud, and the employer in a risk of being caught and penalised).
Reply
#16
The more they furlonged the more tax we will pay in the long run ......would a bank lend someone £100.000 on universal credit because that's what the government are actually doing with no hope of the company paying it back .
Reply
#17
Obviously we have to pay more in taxes, the government aren't lending the companies anything through furlough they're supporting them or the economy would crash completely with no employers. Taxes will need to be collected across the board for the next decade I'd guess - paying more tax in order to keep as many people healthy is a price I will happily pay.
Reply
#18
You can understand why the government need to get people back working to recoup some little money it's a really hard juggling act.....London will be the catalyst in this virus ....if it his has a major upturn there there has to be a major change in working arrangements there and on how they can split the tube and the buses up for workers maybe slot times on your phone etc .
Reply
#19
(05-13-2020, 08:49 AM)baggy1 Wrote: So do you think the better approach would have been for all of the employers to make redundancies and all of the associated redundancy payments that went with that? That seems to be a very good way of putting a lot of businesses into administration very quickly.

Personally I just feel Companies that know they are about to go under anyway are being dishonest - and it's our money they are being dishonest with which we will all have to pay for whether through paye or corporation tax in the year's to come. I think the scheme is good on the whole and without banging on about austerity - let's mention it lol Wink

HMRC dept lost thousands of workers i seem to recall from watching no end of Question Time shows; which was making it tricky for them to chase Companies and individuals using tax avoidance schemes. Had those peeps still been working, no doubt they could have assisted setting schemes up now to help keep any fraud to a minimum. Or maybe so the govt could have taken a more considered approach?
Reply
#20
(05-13-2020, 02:36 PM)baggy1 Wrote: Obviously we have to pay more in taxes, the government aren't lending the companies anything through furlough they're supporting them or the economy would crash completely with no employers. Taxes will need to be collected across the board for the next decade I'd guess - paying more tax in order to keep as many people healthy is a price I will happily pay.

Agree. The government has got much wrong with the handling of this but IMO, they acted decisively in the case of business support. I speak as someone self employed, with offspring a mixture of furloughed or business supported. Of all the things to worry about, finance isn't (currently) one. Personally I have thought for a while now, an increase in income tax wouldn't be the worst thing for the country.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)