http://www.clubcall.com/index.jsp?storyID=286926

 

Birmingham City have been dealt a blow with the news that new signing Radhi Jaidi may not get his work permit through before Saturday.

The 30-year-old signed a three-year deal at St Andrew's this week, following his move from Bolton, and was hoping to make is debut against Colchester this weekend.

 

However, it is understood the paperwork will not go through before Saturday, and the Tunisian may be waiting for two to three weeks to make his debut.

The club has not commented on the story so far.

 

#-o

 

Come on Traf... your the expertise in this area.

 

Would he have needed a new work permit to continue play for us?

no he wouldn't. his work permit with us would have run to the end of his contract. we would have only had to apply for another should we have offered him a new one.

Cheers.

 

That's what I guessed. Maybe they thought he was an EU national. (This is Brum we are talking about #-o )

no he wouldn't. his work permit with us would have run to the end of his contract. we would have only had to apply for another should we have offered him a new one.

 

That is not quite right. His work permit gives him permission to work for Bolton Wanderers (even though footballers are strictly self employed). If he changes employers which in this case he is doing, then his new employers have to apply for a permit to employ him and Jaidi may have to leave the UK and return with his new permit.

Biff, you're wrong I'm afraid.

 

Footballers are not self employed. They receive a monthly salary that is taxed at source and they pay NI at source, unlike self employed workers.

 

Footballers only play for one club at a time and self-employed people are technically not supposed to be tied to one employer, as this actually renders them employed.

So basically, Brum should have applied for a work permit within minutes of him signing.

 

But surely it must just be a rubber stamp job????

Biff, you're wrong I'm afraid.

 

Footballers are not self employed. They receive a monthly salary that is taxed at source and they pay NI at source, unlike self employed workers.

 

Footballers only play for one club at a time and self-employed people are technically not supposed to be tied to one employer, as this actually renders them employed.

 

I see what you're getting at Traf, but that's not neccesarily true either.

 

Dunno about footballers in particular though.

Biff, you're wrong I'm afraid.

 

Footballers are not self employed. They receive a monthly salary that is taxed at source and they pay NI at source, unlike self employed workers.

 

Footballers only play for one club at a time and self-employed people are technically not supposed to be tied to one employer, as this actually renders them employed.

 

I see what you're getting at Traf, but that's not neccesarily true either.

 

Dunno about footballers in particular though.

 

IR35 is all I have to say. :-#

 

EG Ltd.

Isn't IR35 designed to stop people getting their "wages" as a form of dividend as a form of tax and NI avoidance?

 

The general criteria to be self employed do not tally with the role of a footballer either.

From what i can remember to be employed the following needed to be true:

They can't subcontract their work out

None of their own money is at risk upfront

They're not on a set price for a job

They can't set their own timeframe to complete a job

They are not available for hire to other companies

 

 

Footballers are definitely employed by the clubs they play for.

That's why the club had to apply for a permit and not the player.

IR35 is designed to get NI contributions out of "employers" I think.

 

Isn't your definition the wrong way about?

 

EG Ltd - currently doing 3 jobs.

IR35 is designed to get NI contributions out of "employers" I think.

 

Isn't your definition the wrong way about?

 

EG Ltd - currently doing 3 jobs.

 

Aye, I wrote it the wrong way about!

I've altered it now.

The reason I said footballers were self employed was that I was equating them to entertainers, actors etc but thinking about it, they are not the same.

Isn't IR35 designed to stop people getting their "wages" as a form of dividend as a form of tax and NI avoidance?

 

The general criteria to be self employed do not tally with the role of a footballer either.

From what i can remember to be employed the following needed to be true:

They can't subcontract their work out

None of their own money is at risk upfront

They're not on a set price for a job

They can't set their own timeframe to complete a job

They are not available for hire to other companies

 

 

Footballers are definitely employed by the clubs they play for.

That's why the club had to apply for a permit and not the player.

 

You're getting there Traf and all are valid points; it's based upon both what's written contractually and what actually happens - how the work is carried out. Without wanting to get off track too much, IR35 is highly flawed and contracts that are exactly the same have been proven to come out of the system with positive and negative results.

 

There is a difference between working for yourself as a small Ltd company and actually being "self employed".

 

IR piggin 35 has taken over my bleedin' life - I have to look at these contracts every fookin day!

 

Back to the original point, I'm presuming that the footballer having played 75% of internationals is supposed to prove they have spoecialist skills - perhaps akin to the HSMP visa?

Isn't IR35 designed to stop people getting their "wages" as a form of dividend as a form of tax and NI avoidance?

 

The general criteria to be self employed do not tally with the role of a footballer either.

From what i can remember to be employed the following needed to be true:

They can't subcontract their work out

None of their own money is at risk upfront

They're not on a set price for a job

They can't set their own timeframe to complete a job

They are not available for hire to other companies

 

 

Footballers are definitely employed by the clubs they play for.

That's why the club had to apply for a permit and not the player.

 

You're getting there Traf and all are valid points; it's based upon both what's written contractually and what actually happens - how the work is carried out. Without wanting to get off track too much, IR35 is highly flawed and contracts that are exactly the same have been proven to come out of the system with positive and negative results.

 

There is a difference between working for yourself as a small Ltd company and actually being "self employed".

 

IR piggin 35 has taken over my bleedin' life - I have to look at these contracts every fookin day!

 

Back to the original point, I'm presuming that the footballer having played 75% of internationals is supposed to prove they have spoecialist skills - perhaps akin to the HSMP visa?

Isn't IR35 designed to stop people getting their "wages" as a form of dividend as a form of tax and NI avoidance?

 

The general criteria to be self employed do not tally with the role of a footballer either.

From what i can remember to be employed the following needed to be true:

They can't subcontract their work out

None of their own money is at risk upfront

They're not on a set price for a job

They can't set their own timeframe to complete a job

They are not available for hire to other companies

 

 

Footballers are definitely employed by the clubs they play for.

That's why the club had to apply for a permit and not the player.

 

You're getting there Traf and all are valid points; it's based upon both what's written contractually and what actually happens - how the work is carried out. Without wanting to get off track too much, IR35 is highly flawed and contracts that are exactly the same have been proven to come out of the system with positive and negative results.

 

There is a difference between working for yourself as a small Ltd company and actually being "self employed".

 

IR piggin 35 has taken over my bleedin' life - I have to look at these contracts every fookin day!

 

Back to the original point, I'm presuming that the footballer having played 75% of internationals is supposed to prove they have spoecialist skills - perhaps akin to the HSMP visa?

 

 

These days, any solicitor worth his/her salt can get round IR35. It was primarily set up to focus on contractors and issues around NI contributions, but it hasn't had the desired effect. The Inland Revenue will be jumping all over this in the next few years! :-$

 

Taking dividends as your primary source of income is fine, as long as you pay yourself minimum wage taxed at source.

 

Felgate & Ju Darby - your recruitment solutions specialists!

Isn't IR35 designed to stop people getting their "wages" as a form of dividend as a form of tax and NI avoidance?

 

The general criteria to be self employed do not tally with the role of a footballer either.

From what i can remember to be employed the following needed to be true:

They can't subcontract their work out

None of their own money is at risk upfront

They're not on a set price for a job

They can't set their own timeframe to complete a job

They are not available for hire to other companies

 

 

Footballers are definitely employed by the clubs they play for.

That's why the club had to apply for a permit and not the player.

 

You're getting there Traf and all are valid points; it's based upon both what's written contractually and what actually happens - how the work is carried out. Without wanting to get off track too much, IR35 is highly flawed and contracts that are exactly the same have been proven to come out of the system with positive and negative results.

 

There is a difference between working for yourself as a small Ltd company and actually being "self employed".

 

IR piggin 35 has taken over my bleedin' life - I have to look at these contracts every fookin day!

 

Back to the original point, I'm presuming that the footballer having played 75% of internationals is supposed to prove they have spoecialist skills - perhaps akin to the HSMP visa?

 

 

These days, any solicitor worth his/her salt can get round IR35. It was primarily set up to focus on contractors and issues around NI contributions, but it hasn't had the desired effect. The Inland Revenue will be jumping all over this in the next few years! :-$

 

Taking dividends as your primary source of income is fine, as long as you pay yourself minimum wage taxed at source.

 

Felgate & Ju Darby - your recruitment pimps! :-$

The 75% rule is to try and prove the quality of the player.

It's designed to stop the league being over-run by players who have played twice for Fiji and blocking local lads from making it.

Jaidi's work permit has been granted, but he will not feature in Birmingham's opening game.

Jaidi's work permit has been granted, but he will not feature in Birmingham's opening game.

 

Or possibly the next either as he only started training on Thursday.

 

The brummies are chuffed to bits to have got him.

I bet they are chuffed.

He had a decent World Cup and he'll do well a division down.

He only cost ??1m upfront and that's not bad business for a player with 88 caps.

Brum are playing Colchester today, that's a big come down from playing at The Reebok 8-[

Brum are playing Colchester today, that's a big come down from playing at The Reebok  8-[

 

But still much better than Tunisia.

Plus the added number of Africans in the Birmingham area will help him settle in.