Gary Lineker in status row with HMRC
The mainstream media has been awash with reports that former England international and current BBC favourite Gary Lineker is being pursued by HMRC for almost £5 million in unpaid tax. What’s the truth behind the headlines?
As with previous cases, HMRC is attesting that Gary Lineker was engaged on terms that meant he was employed in all but name by the BBC and BT Sports for work done between 2013 and 2018, i.e. whether the engagements were caught by IR35. His services are provided through a personal service company. HMRC is pursuing “unpaid” tax of £3.6 million and NI of £1.3 million.
For his part, Mr Lineker strongly denies that he owes HMRC anything. Interestingly, it has been reported that part of the refuting argument is how much leeway he appears to have in terms of political commentary on social media - BBC employees are required to be impartial on such platforms. Whether this carries any weight at tribunal will be interesting to follow. Mr Lineker can take some encouragement that the cases of Lorraine Kelly and Kaye Adams both found in favour of the presenters. However, Eammon Holmes was less fortunate and is currently awaiting an appeal to the Upper Tribunal after losing his initial appeal.
Related Topics
-
When should you submit a protective claim to HMRC?
Your business has charged VAT on some sales but a recent tribunal decision has indicated that the goods are zero-rated according to the law. Should you submit a claim to HMRC for a rebate on your past sales?
-
Does personal use of business AI tools put tax relief at risk?
You’re self-employed and recently found a subscription service for an AI tool that can do the majority of your admin tasks. It’s so efficient that you’ve started to use it increasingly for non-business tasks too. Can you still claim tax relief?
-
Shifting private residence relief to maximise tax saving
Last year you bought a second home which has increased in value. Meanwhile your main home has devalued. How can you use a tax election to obtain loss relief for one property while exempting the gain on the other?