I can't figure out if the OP's husband has a company or is a sole-trader.
Generally speaking, you cannot pay a PAYE salary to someone for doing nothing. Neither can you pay a large salary to someone who does very little*, especially if that someone is your spouse. My accountant was very clear on that (ok, I suppose you COULD, but Revenue would come down on you like a ton of bricks in the event of an audit).
As the OP is doing the accounts, then she is entitled I suppose an average salary for the hours worked for a bookkeeper.
However, assuming that her husband isn't using up all the allowable tax credits, it's better to set up a limited company and pay both spouses a directors salary - as far as I understand, you can pay a director as much as you want. That's what several accountants recommended to me. That way you maximise the amount of salary for the least amount of tax. You can also exploit other benefits (small awards scheme, bike to work scheme, renting part of your own home for home-office, etc. etc.).
I hate to say this but, sorry, this is terrible advice, in pretty much every respect.
How so, as follows:
While what you've said about paying big salaries for nothing is quite true in the technical sense, practical application is everything: in a husband / wife scenario this would be the greyest of grey areas; exactly how much work was done, when and how, are totally up in the air, and extremely difficult to pin down.
To the extent that a guy who otherwise makes a taxable profit of €50k, pays a PAYE wage to his wife of €20k in a year (reducing his own taxable income to €30k), there's not a tax inspector in the country who's going to challenge it, particularly if she has no other employment etc to suggest she wouldn't have been available to work for the husband.
I don't know what accountants you've been talking to, but personally I have never encountered a problem where a wife has been put through a payroll for a wage, and PAYE correctly operated on it - this point is relevant, its not enough to pretend a wage was paid, it should actually be visibly paid by cheque / transfer, or the Inspector may decide to call shenanigans on the fiction (but this is a different issue altogether).
You go on to say that that her husband isn't using up all the allowable tax credits, it's better to set up a limited company and pay both spouses a directors salary. This makes no sense at all, since if he isn't even earning enough to use up all the available credits / standard rate band, then there's no tax to be saved by incorporating a Ltd company.
Likewise if the business is only generating a subsistence income for the trader, there is no way a Ltd co is the way to go - incorporating is generally only ever recommended where a person's business is generating substantially more cash than they actually need to draw, and as a result they are being taxed at the high income tax rate on money that they don't want / need to extract. (Or a situation where there is sufficient financial risk involved in the business that the person feels the need to have limited liability).
The administrative and compliance burdens are greatly increased when operating a limited company, reporting to both CRO & Revenue (for both the company and the directors), which increases the cost base of the business.
So that's why it wasn't great advice - factually correct, granted, but as advice for the specific situation, not great.