Search

How can we help?

Icon

IR35: Eamonn Holmes found to be employed for tax purposes

TV presenter Eamonn Holmes has lost his appeal against a 2018 tax tribunal finding that income tax and national insurance was due on his earnings as presenter of This Morning because his contract with ITV amounted to employment for tax purposes.

ITV engaged Mr Holmes via his personal services company, and he argued that he was “totally freelance” and had “total control” over how he acted as a presenter on This Morning. However, in a Judgment of the Upper Tax Tribunal published on 21 February, the Judge found that “there was sufficient mutuality and at least a sufficient framework of control to place the assumed relationship between ITV and Mr Holmes in the employment field.

The Judge said that “On that basis and, having regard to all other relevant factors, my view is that overall, throughout all relevant tax years, the assumed relationship between ITV and Mr Holmes was one of an employment rather than self-employment.”

He argued that he was “totally freelance” and had “total control”.

In essence, the finding is that, if you took the intermediary out of the picture, it was work an employee would be doing.

This highlights how important it is for all businesses which engage consultants and contractors to understand how different working arrangements will affect their financials.

This is a case under law on IR35 as it is at present, meaning that Mr Holmes’ personal service company will have to pay the tax and national insurance due, which is estimated to be in the region of £250,000. Had this been decided under the new IR35 law which will apply from 6 April 2020, it would have been ITV picking up the tab.

Disclaimer
This information is for guidance purposes only and should not be regarded as a substitute for taking legal advice. Please refer to the full General Notices on our website.

Author profile

About this article

Read, listen and watch our latest insights

art
  • 03 November 2026
  • Commercial Real Estate

Ban on upwards-only rent reviews: What can landlords of 1954 Act protected leases do?

The commencement of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Act (the Act) poses a real threat to the interests of landlords whose business tenants are protected under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (LTA) (as well as those that are outside the LTA).

art
  • 29 October 2026
  • Immigration

UK Immigration shake-up: More flexibility for skilled workers, but at what cost?

The UK Government has outlined further changes to its immigration system, with new measures affecting international graduates, sponsored workers, and businesses employing overseas talent.

art
  • 28 October 2026
  • Privacy and Data Protection

Remote working: 5 key data protection risks for employers

Remote working has become more prominent in modern business. While flexible working arrangements can improve productivity and employee wellbeing, they also create new data protection risks. Regardless of the physical location in which work is done, compliance with UK GDPR does not change.

art
  • 27 October 2026
  • Employment

Fire and Rehire update: Key changes delayed

The Government has published two documents giving key updates to the anticipated changes around ‘fire and rehire’ and restricted contractual variations, coming about as a result of the Employment Rights Act 2025 (“ERA 2025”). We now understand that these changes will now be delayed to March, rather than January 2027.

art
  • 26 October 2026
  • Corporate and M&A

Shareholders’ Agreements for Founders and Investors – SHA Series Part 3 of 5

A shareholders’ agreement is arguably one of the most valuable corporate governance agreements (along with articles of association) in any private UK company with more than one shareholder.

art
  • 23 October 2026
  • Litigation and dispute resolution

Section 172 Companies Act 2006: Key lessons from Saxon Woods v Costa

The Supreme Court’s decision in Saxon Woods v Costa UKSC 21 clarifies directors’ duties under Section 172 Companies Act 2006, confirming that good faith requires both honest belief and appropriate conduct.