Yes, but it is likely on the facts given the wages are well under all the tax and NI levels so all this panic on the thread is not helpful to the pesron concerned. The basic point is that if you pay someone two mornings a week or 2 evenings a week to mind your children as long as in your house is not subject to registration, is legal and probably does not have tax implications particularly if she earns nothing else from anyone. So the poster can probably sleep easy and go away without worries unless she wants the child looked after in her friend's place.
Just to clear it up, the main reasons a babysitter is not employed are:
1. Babysitting is generally booked on an ad hoc basis; the parents have no right to expect that the babysitter will be available for work and the babysitter has no right to expect the parents to ask them to babysit.
2. Once the children are in bed a babysitter can generally do as he wishes - read a book, watch a film, do homework or marking etc.
Note that neither of these are necessary conditions, but either is sufficient on its own.
Mr anchovy surely you are not allowed to take the cleaners word for it that she is self employed? Also what difference does it make if the sitter can do what they want when children are in bed. What about people on call ? They still get taxed.
I don't think this is the place for a full analysis of the whole of employment law, however I will try to provide some answers:
"surely you are not allowed to take the cleaners word for it that she is self employed?"
No - what the cleaner says is irrelevant. The person engaging the cleaner determines that they are not employing the cleaner and therfore they are not liable to operate PAYE. That is their only obligation.
"Also what difference does it make if the sitter can do what they want when children are in bed."
It removes the element of "control" which is an essential element of a contract of service i.e. employment.
"What about people on call ? They still get taxed."
Yes they do because taken as a whole their contract is a contract of service and so all payments made under it are taxable as remuneration.
This seems to be going the wrong way. My only question was if it is illegal to pay a friend who is not registered to look after our daughter while I'm at work (in her own house I should have added). From the documents that somebody has linked its clear that it is so we need to look at other options.
I thought Mumsnet is about support, advie and experience, why are some people so aggressive? Not only in this thread BTW.
"Guidelines from HMRC decide who is self-employed/employed."
Actually that is not true. HMRC use those guidlines in order to determine employment status for Income Tax purposes (and by implication for National Insurance purposes although NI is actually imposed by a statute with different criteria), however it is generally acknowleged that those guidelines often come to an incorrect decision, with the error almost always being falsely concluding employment.
However, as HMRC themselves recognise in their internal manual, employment status in any particular case can only be decided on a detailed examination of the facts of that case and whether on balance the facts determine firstly that a contract exists between the parties, and secondly that the contract is a contract of service.
Anyway I thought it said two mornings a week so no tax issues would be likely to arise. She wants it to be care in the friend's home and to pay her and I think we answered that further up. There was a case inthe press I think about two mothers wanting to go back to work and if they swapped houses when the other was working (both part time working) they were okay. If they stayed in their own house when home then not which of course shows the regulations are ridiculous but we have to work around them.
Who polices this tho? Dil looks after dds and I bung her a few quid I also pay a local teen for occasional evenings out and my pil and dm help too. Fuck em. Sick of this country telling everyone what to do. We claim no benefits so they can keep their beaks out of my business
Doctrine all the information on that link has been superceded by the regulations explained in Flisspaps link in the third post in this thread. It would probably have been best if that had been left as the last post too.