The government has published its response to feedback received
on its proposals to simplify the taxation of termination payments,
expected to come into force in April 2018.
The following table sets out the main proposals and the effect
these will have on employers. Importantly, there is no change to
the current £30,000 tax free allowance.
payments above £30,000 to be subject to employer National
Insurance contributions (NICs).
payments above £30,000 only attract income tax, not
While employer NICs will be payable under the proposal, employee
At 13.8%, the addition of
employer NICs could add a not inconsiderable cost to paying a
termination payment exceeding £30,000.
2. All payments in
lieu of notice (PILONs) (contractual and non-contractual) to be
taxed as income.
Currently, contractual and
non-contractual PILONs are taxed differently.
Contractual PILONs (that are provided for in the employment
contract) are treated as earnings and subject to income tax and
both employer and employee NICs. Non-contractual PILONs, which are
paid in the absence of the contractual right to do so, are subject
to income tax, but not NICs.
It isn't always
straightforward to determine whether a PILON is contractual or not
given that HMRC can also have regard to the regularity with which
the employer pays PILONs.
This clarification is actually welcome given the differences in
opinion which can arise when negotiating a settlement
3. Injury to feelings
awards (such as for harassment or discrimination) will not qualify
for general injury tax exemptions.
There is an exemption to
income tax on termination payments, in addition to the
£30,000 threshold, when a payment is made because of death,
disability or injury of the employee.
It is currently unclear whether injury to feelings awards qualify
for the exemption as there have been contradictory decisions on the
This proposal would provide
additional welcome clarity, but in common with all 3 proposals,
means increased cost to employers.
These changes are likely to come into force in April
2018. Given that items 2 and 3 in the table clarify points
that are currently argued either way, a prudent employer might want
to veer on the side of caution when considering those issues before
Lauren Goda (Trainee) contributed to this article.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
Everyone has sympathy for employees who are genuinely unwell. When advising employers about employees suffering from stress, various medical conditions and resultant absence, it is these words that come up again and again.
In our article published in HR Zone, we consider the introduction of the new rules on regulatory references which come into force on 7 March 2017 and the practical steps that employers must take to comply...
Most of us know the difference between being employed and being self-employed (or at least we think we do). And in everyday laymen's terms, the difference is relatively straightforward and obvious – if you are employed, you work for someone else and, if you are self-employed, you ‘work for yourself'.
This coming year looks to be another busy one with more significant employment law changes coming into force and we have highlighted some of the key changes, which range from the introduction of gender pay...
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).