NIM18160 - Class 1B NICs : Liability : Special requirements for SSP, SMP, SPP and SAP entitlement
Regulation 17(2) of the Statutory Sick Pay (General) Regulations 1982, regulation 20(2) of the Statutory Maternity Pay (General) Regulations 1986 and regulation 39(2)(b) of the Statutory Paternity Pay and Statutory Adoption Pay (General) Regulations 2002
By replacing Class 1 NICs liability with Class 1B NICs on items
included in a PSA, there may be occasions when an employee fails to
qualify for Statutory Sick Pay (SSP), Statutory Maternity Pay
(SMP), Statutory Paternity Pay (SPP) or Statutory Adoption Pay
(SAP). (See
NIM18010 and
NIM18110 for information about when
Class 1B NICs are payable in place of Class 1 or Class 1A NICs.)
This is because entitlement to SSP, SMP, SPP and SAP relies
upon the level of gross earnings paid in a specific period being at
least at the level of the lower earnings limit. The introduction of
Class 1B NICs will mean that the gross pay recorded by an employer
for individual employees may be reduced as they no longer have to
identify the full remuneration applicable to every employee.
The consequence for SSP, SMP, SPP and SAP is that this could
mean that the amount which goes through a PSA is not taken into
account for the purposes of calculating average weekly earnings. As
a result, the employee’s average weekly earnings may be below
the lower earnings limit. This would mean that the employee would
not qualify for SSP, SMP, SPP or SAP.
To safeguard against this circumstance the forms which notify
employees of their failure to satisfy the conditions for SSP, SMP,
SPP and SAP carry a notation advising employees to contact their
employer where they have received payments which have not been
shown on their payslips. Where the only reason for an employee
failing to qualify for SSP, SMP, SPP or SAP is the fact that their
earnings have been calculated to be below the lower earnings limit,
the employer
must
- track the payments to the individual which have gone through the PSA and which would otherwise have attracted a Class 1 liability
- recalculate the gross earnings for SSP, SMP, SPP or SAP by taking into account the earnings which went through the PSA
- determine whether the employee’s total earnings actually satisfy the average earnings condition so that they qualify for the benefit.
Although this additional work may seem to counter the administrative benefit of the PSA (that is, the employer no longer having to keep detailed records of such payments) few employees will have a significant amount of their earnings included in a PSA. It follows that not many employees will have their rights to SSP, SMP, SPP or SAP impacted in this fashion.
