To feel like this is discrimination towards certain trades

[Unicorns87]

Basically I'm looking for other people's opinions on this matter. I understand it will probably be extremely mixed views.
But I am very confused by how it works and how it is fair to certain people like myself.

I am a self-employed mobile nail technician. I am only part-time now because I have a little boy and my job itself isn't a huge earner anyway. After all my costs, I pretty much take minimum wage.

My trade is one of the ones that has been deemed unsafe/illegal to carry out during lockdown. So the government have told me I cannot under any circumstances work but only paid me 80%, then 70% and now 40% when claiming the SEISS.

However, I have a friend who has been honest with me about her partner. He is a carpenter. He is already on a very high wage and therefore claimed almost £7,000 for the first 3 months SEISS at 80%.
But the type of work he does meant that he was actually able to carry on working and earned almost what he would have done had coronavirus not occured.
He then claimed the 2nd lot and I expect will claim the 3rd as because he is self employed and takes his own money, he will somehow make it look like he hasn't earned what he would have done.
Therefore, she admitted that they are thousands of pounds better off then what they would have been.

How is this fair. It's a simple case of the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer.
How is it fair that the people who have been told cannot work can still only claim the same amount as what the people who have been told can work if they can socially distance.
Surely those type of trades should have only been able to claim a fraction of what the trades who werent allowed to work could.

My husband was then made redundant, has had to take a huge paycut and in the second lockdown I have been told I cannot work again but can only claim 40%.
We are going to lose our home.
Yet my friend and her partner and I'm sure plenty of others are laughing.

The problem is that he’s almost certainly committing fraud.

But in reality I do think that people need to think about careers which are future proofed/having savings to fall back on. There’s a lot of jobs which I’d love to have done but I’ve chosen financial stability and security over that!

It's not discrimination and it sounds like he is committing something close to fraud. But as a business owner, if you want to stay afloat, given your industry, it sounds like you need to start getting creative. What can you offer people that will be appropriately socially distanced and still allow you to earn? The businesses that are doing that are the ones that are surviving and thriving. Dh has a business, one that relies on the restaurant and catering industry for about 90% of what he brings in. Obviously, with restaurants and caterers not open, he's had to get creative. He's shifted to marketing to home cooks/general public and he can barely keep up with sales and it's been this way since the start of the first lockdown. Can you create 'do-it yourself' kits, at home spa kits, push gift vouchers as a 'post-lockdown pamper'? Figure out what people will still buy even if you can't provide the service right here and now face to face.

Sorry for your situation OP. I work in the health and beauty industry too in a self employed position. Partner also SE but in a trade. Partner definitely benefited more from the Seiss than I did but he was by no means fraudulent.
I certainly feel that (as usual) roles generally performed by women have taken the hit here. I understand the need for us to shut down as it really is impossible to social distance in our work but it’s appalling that we are only entitled to 40% compared to the furloughed being entitled to 80%
Hopefully the government will U turn on this quickly. I feel very undervalued. Those people belittling your job on this thread - ignore them. I used to have an “important” career. I actually helped very little. People regularly now tell me what a difference I make to their happiness and I’m sure it’s the same for you.
I hope this situation improves for you

All those saying it’s fraud... the OP states they have been told he earned almost as much as he would have done had coronavirus not occurred. He has been, therefore, negatively impacted and is well within his rights to claim, or am I wrong?

If he’s committing fraud then he will get found out and prosecuted. My close friend deals with HMRC on a daily basis and they are closely looking at all claims.

My partner is a carpenter and claimed the first lot of relief, no where near the amount the OP said as his income wasnt that high. It saved our bacon.

He is no longer self employed and his firm which do repairs in social housing are continuing as normal, although its a bit watch this space for materials situation.

I can definitely see why he is allowed to continue to work. Clients maintain 2m distance, pref will not be in same room and he works alone most of the time. Mask, ppe etc.

Nail techs can't socially distance, its that simple. Its not discrimination.

I do however feel desperate for small businesses trying to stay afloat. Its so shit

My dp only claimed because he was unable to work due to covid, it made it very clear that he wasnt to work or income will be taken into account. The OPs friend is going to be hammered at tax return time as it is taxable income

Your friend's husband is committing fraud, other trades have too, some builders for example.

He is gaming the system regardless of his level of qualifications!

He is not alone, unfortunately, and all of us that pay tax will be paying for him, and others, for a long, long time

He might have claimed when no teligible. But the government didn't say how much your business had to be affected... so you can't know if he lost a contract which could have made him eligible.

The first 3 months SEISS are my busiest in the year. It would have looked like I was claiming fraudulently too. But I lost a large client, just not one who is particularly busy at that time of year. He may not have done anything wrong.

And it's not discrimination. Nail techs have to be in physical contact with a client...

It is bloody awful though. As others have said, any other strings to your bow? I'm having to think well outside my usual box as there is NOTHING I can do to influence my usual work!

Hey OP it has been announced that we will receive the 80% same as the furloughed so that’s a small bit of good news

Yes, the details are changing as I read round.

Yay!

But if the OP was doing a “need to have” trade she’d still be able to work.

Carpentry isn’t a need to have either.

Op I sympathise. I have been registered self employed very part time for about 5 years but it was only last year that I started regular work so earning circu 300pm.
I had no work during lockdown and I received £125 for the whole 3 months. I never claimed the 2nd grant as I was back working. Will be 300 down in November again and I will get £62.50.
Meanwhile those on furlough at my dhs company were on fill pay and accruing holiday whilst he worked.
I feel honest self employed have been monumentally screwed especially those who have minimal history.
I wouldn't want to be someone who cheated the system though as I am sure they will ask for evidence.

It’s definitely fraud and she’s an idiot for telling people. I wish the people (and I would imagine there are a lot of them) doing these things realised that they are effectively stealing from their children and grandchildren (and yours and mine) who will have to pay these colossal debts back. I’d seriously consider reporting it.

The rules about which people can work and who can't, are ridiculous. I'm a massage therapist and work in a medical/ healthcare setting, I'm not allowed to massage but the physiotherapist who works in the same place can. The osteopath can do acupuncture but the acupuncturist can't. If we are all wearing the same PPE in the same setting why can we not work? So saying that a nail technician can't work because she can't distance herself really doesn't make any sense when neither can the physio or osteo.

@Goodnamesalltaken

The rules about which people can work and who can't, are ridiculous. I'm a massage therapist and work in a medical/ healthcare setting, I'm not allowed to massage but the physiotherapist who works in the same place can. The osteopath can do acupuncture but the acupuncturist can't. If we are all wearing the same PPE in the same setting why can we not work? So saying that a nail technician can't work because she can't distance herself really doesn't make any sense when neither can the physio or osteo.

Is there an issue of some professions being overseen by government guidelines?

‘Adversely affected’ doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be earning at all. You can apply if your income is down on previous pre covid months, so even if you’re earning a good amount, if it’s less than previous months then your income is adversely affected. So if that’s the case with your friend, he’s not committing fraud at all.

All these people saying it's fraud need to read the actual law and guidance. "Adversely affected" can mean lots of things. It can mean loss of a contract, loss of a customer, higher overheads, higher product costs, working fewer hours, etc. There's not a single word in the legislation/guidance saying that they can't work, or that their profits have to be a certain amount less than normal. Blame the idiotic Chancellor, Treasury and HMRC for fouling up the covid support schemes, not the people who are claiming within the letter of the law.

@Goodnamesalltaken

The rules about which people can work and who can't, are ridiculous. I'm a massage therapist and work in a medical/ healthcare setting, I'm not allowed to massage but the physiotherapist who works in the same place can. The osteopath can do acupuncture but the acupuncturist can't. If we are all wearing the same PPE in the same setting why can we not work? So saying that a nail technician can't work because she can't distance herself really doesn't make any sense when neither can the physio or osteo.

There is always going to be issues there, mostly revolving around regulatory bodies, levels of 'professionalism' and training.

Like dietician or nutritionist.. one is fully regulated, has a high level of mandatory education and professional standing. The other does not.

I would also guess this guy is playing the system, taking cash and not accounting for it on his official books.

I seem to remember when the Tories got in quite a few years ago there was a push to get people working for themselves. I would like to think that people like this will get pulled up on it, but he wont, the Tories have effectively bought his vote for years to come.

When the first lockdown was brought in and furlough was announced there was a feeling that people, who had totally legally, used the dividend system, where going to get screwed and tough shit to you.

Who is getting money, benefits, who is going to survive financially, and who isn't feels increasingly political, and gendered.

Carpentry is a useful skilled trade that needs protected. Pretty nails are pretty nails...unfortunately it’s got to be about protecting the overall economy and we do not need our nails done.

@BlindAssassin1

I would also guess this guy is playing the system, taking cash and not accounting for it on his official books.

I seem to remember when the Tories got in quite a few years ago there was a push to get people working for themselves. I would like to think that people like this will get pulled up on it, but he wont, the Tories have effectively bought his vote for years to come.

When the first lockdown was brought in and furlough was announced there was a feeling that people, who had totally legally, used the dividend system, where going to get screwed and tough shit to you.

Who is getting money, benefits, who is going to survive financially, and who isn't feels increasingly political, and gendered.

The self employed "push" happened years earlier under Blair/Brown.

Brown brought in lower rates of tax for limited companies but didn't bring in lower rates for sole traders and partnerships. So being a limited company became the "norm" - why wouldn't you? Even window cleaners, dog walkers, etc became limited companies. All because of Gordon Brown! I'm all for blaming the Tories for things they've done, but Brown is responsible for a lot of today's self employment tax/nic anomalies arising from the use of limited companies. Quite simply, limited companies weren't in common use for one man bands, consultants, tiny businesses etc until Gordon Brown came to office. The statistics speak for themselves - massive increases in company formations in the early noughties.

The recent National Audit Office report said that up to 2.9 million self employed received no covid support because of arbitrary/inconsistent rules brought in by HMRC/Treasury/Chancellor. Eg, only sold traders who were trading as at 5/4/19 are eligible for SEISS whereas employees could be furloughed if they were on payroll in February 2020 - nearly a year different - why? Sole trader support isn't available for a sole trader who earned £50,001 in 18/19 yet the £2,500 per month furlough is available for employees earning £100,000 in the 19/20 tax year - why the difference?

He’s committing fraud

Then his wife boasts about it

Nice “friends”

Hope you can figure things out OP, these are very tough and unfair times

I'm all for blaming the Tories for things they've done, but Brown is responsible for a lot of today's self employment tax/nic anomalies arising from the use of limited companies.

You're right, Badbadbunny, my mistake.

The whole system from top to bottom is shocking.

@BlindAssassin1

I'm all for blaming the Tories for things they've done, but Brown is responsible for a lot of today's self employment tax/nic anomalies arising from the use of limited companies.

You're right, Badbadbunny, my mistake.

The whole system from top to bottom is shocking.

It's the incompetence of The Treasury and HMRC (and it's forerunners) that is shocking. Politicians come and go, but the same civil servants remain and it's they who havn't a clue about tax/self employment etc. They are very blinkered and biased, and have been for a couple of decades, which explains the anomalies and unfairness of the covid support grant rules - they're using anecdote rather than facts/statistics to support who they deem "worthy" and kick those they deem unworthy. I've been an accountant for over 35 years and seen a lot over that time. In earlier years, tax inspectors were professional and respectable. In the last 20 years or so, the HMRC have become very arrogant, biased, and frankly incompetent at all levels. I can't wait to retire to escape from having to deal with them on a daily basis.