Short PRSI. Can I claim PRSI for work done in the black economy 34 years ago?

So if IR charges 10% interest rate per year without compounding, we would have the following scenario:
Employee IR£ 151 converted to Euro is Euro 182.71. Add 340% interest and we have Euro 621.21.
Employer IR£ 238 converted to Euro is Euro 287.98. Add 340% interest rate and we stand at Euro 979.13.
Those figures are actually not bad at all. Can anybody confirm?
I would do the deal and would advice my friend and former employer to go ahead if those figures are correct.
 
PRSI isn't all that the employer would owe if he went ahead with this plan, he should have operated emergency tax as he presumably had no tax credit cert for the employee. So you're looking at whatever the higher rate of tax was back then plus the PRSI plus 35 years worth of interest which would probably at least treble the amount.
 
I have no direct experience of Revenue but have worked in other large organisations.

I would smell a rat if one employer approached me with regard to exactly one employee for a specific period 35 years ago.
 
The employer would not approach SW about the missing PRSI contributions. It would be the employee. He has several ex co workers who would be willing to confirm the time your man worked in the company. SW would contact the employer and ask for his view on the matter.
I'd say SW will grant the contributions after some interviews- which could stretch over 12 months or more- and the contributions will appear on the record as soon as the outstanding money is paid in full- whenever that will be.
The employer sold the business more than 25 years ago and started something new. He closed the new business some years ago and is retired since. The original business was closed down by the new owner after about 5 years of trading.
I cannot see a colossal fine, etc mounting up to tens of thousands of Euros coming down the road towards either of those folks. Maximum estimated costs Euro 1000 for the employee, about Euro 1500 for the employer. Most likely it will be less and more like the figures above- but you never know for sure. The employee won't have any tax problems either due to the fact that this income was his only income for the tax year 1989/1990. I doubt that IR will start searching for something rotten in the business of the employer. Everything happened too many years ago.
It is a good deal for the employee. The employer will only have trouble out of this for some time but this will pass as well.
It is up to those two men to do something- or leave the whole thing alone. It is not my decision to make. I only asked for some opinions.
I will report back here if there are some developments in the future.
 
Forumuser said:
I was not told how many contributions your man needs. He was talking about several gaps in his PRSI count. I suspect more skeletons in the cupboard.
Click to expand...

Revenue and Social Protection will probably share your suspicions and will hopefully carry out a thorough audit of your friend's past.
 
T McGibney said:
The flip side of this though is the cast iron certainty that your friend won't get PRSI credits granted on foot of their claim, simply because Revenue lack both the power and the resources to properly verify them.
Click to expand...
What about the workers who would verify the job? That cannot be ignored.
 
jpd said:
Where's the documentary evidence ?

None
Click to expand...
There are indeed no written records with any wage figures left.
But as I said there are eye witnesses. On top of that there is a hospital file in existence, confirming the employment in the company after a hospital treatment due to a small incident at work.
 
It would be very surprising if Welfare/Revenue were to assign two of their best investigators to the case of the missing £1950 from 1989. And if they did it would be because they reckon there is a lot more to be unearthed. I wonder if this is not at least a part of the motivation here:

Forumuser said:
There are 4 eye witnesses around- ex colleagues. At least on of them would testify in court. He once fell badly out with the employer and would only be too willing to cut his throat with great pleasure.
Click to expand...

@Forumuser, would it be unfair to wonder if your friend was not a knowing and willing collaborator in the arrangement back then?
 
Ruffian said:
Everyone knows, and knew, that working on a cash basis saves income tax and PRSI payments. It's a bit late now to say it was a mistake
Click to expand...
At that time it was the only possibility for someone not too long out of school and having no qualification to get a foothold on the job market. Many employers "out in the sticks" ran parts of their business that way. They had fully registered staff as the core staff- and took on young lads looking for some money to be able to go to the pub and impress the girls. That was mostly done during the summer months, depending on the business but also at other times. Those guys could be easily get sacked when there was not enough work anymore. I say easy- because due to the nature of the employment they had no rights. The employer had a free run there.
We have to consider the young age of our man and the economical circumstances at that time as well.
I certainly would not condemn him. He had very little possibilities and took what was on offer.
 

@Forumuser, would it be unfair to wonder if your friend was not a knowing and willing collaborator in the arrangement back then?

My expression of "cutting a throat" is certainly well off board. I tried to show that at least one ex worker would come forward, motivated by the behaviour of the former employer towards him at one stage of their relationship. I tried to show that there was for sure no lack of at least one witness to confirm the job. I now know that there are at least 3 others who would be willing to testify. Did they all suddenly join forces to "get" at the former employer...after 34 years??? Please don't blow this thing out of all proportions. There is no conspiracy here. Neither was there a massive tax fraud on the employers side. These ideas are grotesque.
It is about missing PRSI contributions- nothing else. A guy has a clear gap in his PRSI history. He can present several witnesses who can confirm that he actually worked in that company for some months. A hospital file names the employer. Any judge and jury would show at least an interest in witnesses and written evidence. Why do folks think it is impossible to work this thing out?
 
Last edited:
Forumuser said:
It is about missing PRSI contributions- nothing else.
Click to expand...
Actually it's about PRSI contributions that were never paid - not ones that are "missing".

Here's an example of missing contributions:

Supporting evidence for missing PRSI contributions

If you find missing contributions on your contribution statement, what kind of "supporting documentary evidence" can be offered? I was thinking payslips for that year, but I doubt I can find all the paper statements from over a decade ago. The company has gone under since then. Or maybe bank...
www.askaboutmoney.com
 

It's also about an employer breaking the law. That may have consequences, regardless of their irrelevance to your friend's desire to rewrite the past.

Anyway, seeing as you've already made up your mind about this, why bother asking the members of this forum for their views?
 
That is correct. The contributions were never paid. But they should have. And we are looking into this to find out how that can be achieved.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register