JB for a Co. Director - class A PRSI paid

M

Mama

Registered User
Messages
14
Hi,

Myself and husband are directors of a Ltd Co. I have 90% share and he has 10% share. I'm class S PRSI and he is class A PRSI.

He was employed by the company until the end of 2009 but due to lack of work he left and got JB. At the end of 2010 I was able to take him back onto the payroll as a new contact came in. Sadly by the end of June 2011 I could no longer pay him so he left again and signed on.

He is still waiting for a decision on the JB application. He has been down to the SW office but they say it's out of their hands now ??? Don't know what that means.

He now is working somewhere else on a 3-day week and he is sending in the yellow forms each week but still not even getting the payment for the other 3 days.

I'm just wondering if anyone would know why it's taking so long and what the problem would be ?

Thanks
 
Hi Mama,

It seems unusual to me that the spouse of a prop director was liable to pay PRSI at class A. Did you check with Scope section of Social Welfare?

Perhaps this is causing a delay.

I gather a lot of offices are experiencing severe delays and maybe that's what's going on. At least if that's the case payment will be backdated to when he first claimed when it eventually comes through.
 
Thanks for the reply Mrs Vimes. I've always thought that a non-prop director ie. under 15% shares was classed as class A PRSI.

I just rang the scope section there and they is some legal work going on regarding the whole PRSI class of directors and they have 150+ cases that they can't make a ruling on until it's sorted out.
 
While he is a non-prop director himself, as your spouse he may well be treated differently to a non-related to prop director
 
Just maybe it might look to the welfare like you are playing the system?
I.e. you had no work for him for the exact time that JSB was payable,and then took him on again just to replenish his stamps.
 
Does this help

3.5.1 Employment by a spouse

Employment in the service of the husband or wife of the employed person is not insurable. However, where one member of a married couple is employed under a contract of service by a partnership consisting of the spouse and another person or persons, s/he will ordinarily be regarded as employed by the partnership and not by the spouse. This will also apply in the case of a limited company in which either member of the couple is a director. In each of these cases the spouse is not employed directly by the other spouse but through the partnership or limited company. The employment will be insurable if it is under a contract of service.
 
Thanks Blacksheep. That is helpful.

Vandriver - they may be thinking that but they could see from the cash-flow of the business that it was necessary. I wonder if he'd gone and got a six month temp contract elsewhere would they think the same
 
Yes we got sorted. An inspector came out to visit. They wanted to make sure he was an employee even though he was a director of the company. Asked loads of questions and then she said she was happy that he was in fact an employee.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top