any difference in entitlements in s class stamp?

N

ninak

Registered User
Messages
131
I am director of our company with my partner. We are both S0 class at the moment. Had been advised to look in to S1 class as it is more beneficial. When I looked on the welfare site I saw no advantage to it. My partner is over the €500 a week, I am under it. Also, we both hold full medical cards so I presume we should be on S2 anyway.
What are the differences within the S class? Is there a way to avoid problems with entitlements in the future, such as pensions, by making extra contributions or something now. We are both in our 30's so pension is a way off but I would rather not make a mistake now that I will regret later.
 
Once you are S class the benefits are the same ( state contributory pension and maternity benefits). Whether you are S0 or S1 merely differentiates between those liable to the Health Contribution Levy ( for which you get nothing anyway) and as you said S2 for medical card holders.
 
jack2009 said:
Would you or your wife benefit more if on A class rather than S?
Click to expand...

Benefits from and payments of PRSI under class A are more than class S. Unfortunately class S contributors do not have a choice as to what class they pay. Proprietory directors and self-employed must pay class S.
 
Graham_07 said:
Benefits from and payments of PRSI under class A are more than class S. Unfortunately class S contributors do not have a choice as to what class they pay. Proprietory directors and self-employed must pay class S.
Click to expand...

But both directors are not always proprietory directors.
 
jack2009 said:
But both directors are not always proprietory directors.
Click to expand...

Correct and in such case they would be class A. However in the context of the OP's question my point was that proprietory directors do not have a choice. They must be classed as S. If the OP and his spouse are classed ( using Social Welfare's rules and not Revenue's rules ) as proprietory directors then they must pay class S. Since the OP mentioned that they were already Class S, one might be forgiven for assuming that someone already adjudged that they should be on that class for a reason.
 

I am sure you will agree with me that there are many directors on class S when they should not as they go by the Revenue rules! That was the only reason I mentioned it.
 
jack2009 said:
I am sure you will agree with me that there are many directors on class S when they should not as they go by the Revenue rules! That was the only reason I mentioned it.
Click to expand...

True, people ( and by this I include not only directors but often their accountants and payroll providers) often use the 15% shareholding Revenue criteria to determine the PRSI class. This is not always appropriate as Social Welfare have a broader view with the definition of "control" being more important in their determination. I have had a 5% director deemed to be class S when, coupled with her husband's 49% shareholding meant that she had "effective control" as they jointly had control when shareholdings were combined. It is dangerous to assume classes and if in doubt Scope Section in Social Welfare should be consulted.
 
I just tell everyone to go to scope and find out for sure cause you have to go to them if you want to make a claim so best to find out early on rather than wait and see/hope etc.!

agree with your comments about accountants etc think most of them work off the 15% rule and only find out about scope when the SXXX hits the fan!
 
Thanks for all the input on this subject. Myself and my husband are both proprietory directors, 50/50. No avoiding S class. Seems to me that S class is just another way of making it harder to set up a business in this country.
Actually, I feel a bit of a rant about this coming so will create the rest of this response in a different post.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register