PAYROLL
classification of one of the claimants as self-employed. In fact, she should have been classified as an employee, which meant the criteria for assessment of eligibility were slightly different. He went on to clarify: “Even if DL had been self-employed in that work, however, the judge’s approach was wrong because the regulations limit the way in which self-employed income is calculated where it is to be amalgamated with the expected income from employed earnings. A wholly self-employed person’s expected income can be calculated under regulation 5 (1) (b) (i) with its reference to the relevant threshold within the declaration period as for an employed person; alternatively, it may be calculated under 5 (1) (b) (ii): (ii): ‘The person’s expected income from the work in the period specified in paragraph (5) is greater than or equal to four times the relevant threshold’.” The judge referred to the case of Johnson and Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Johnson, which he considered bolstered his own arguments for how eligibility should be calculated because it, “considered the rationality of regulations under the universal credit
v Woods reported as R(DLA) 5/98, “exceptionally, decisions may be made that are prospective in effect” and the claims could therefore stand, and the claimants’ entitlement to the funds would remain valid as if the expiration date had not yet passed or become time-barred. Summary There is an intricate mix of welfare and employment taxes legislation in this case. This highlights the need for different government departments to align their policies and legislation to avoid anomalies arising. n This highlights the need for different government departments to align their policies and legislation to avoid anomalies arising
scheme in the context of difficulties arising out of double payments from employers in some months due to the movement of pay days due to public holidays”. This caused difficulties in the calculation of otherwise regular benefit payments of universal credit to affected employees. The point was made that, “it is…no part of the policy underlying universal credit to encourage claimants to base their employment choices on the salary payment date offered by a prospective employer. Yet that is what is happening for these Respondents”. Prospective decision – were the claims time-barred? When considering the period for which the claimant’s declaration has effect, Regulation 15 of the Childcare (etc.) Regulations 2016 provides that where a tribunal decides a case under regulation 24, the date of that tribunal decision counts as being the first day of the first period in which the declaration has effect. Basically, it’s treated as if the claim has just been made on the date of the decision. The judge concluded that, in accordance with Evans LJ in Chief Adjudication Officer
Fast-track your learning
Are you looking to progress faster through our Foundation Degrees in either payroll or pensions?
Do you have at least two years’ experience as a payroll or pensions professional?
The CIPP’s Recognition of Prior Learning online assessment uses evaluation of existing skills and knowledge to help you move straight on to year two of the Foundation Degrees.
To find out more, email enquiries@cipp.org.uk or call 0121 712 1044 .
15
| Professional in Payroll, Pensions and Reward |
Issue 80 | May 2022
Made with FlippingBook - Online magazine maker