PicRights and The Tax Man

[psmith]

Just taking a look at Picrights most recent P&L accounts, available freely on the internet.

Some things stand out, in my opinion, such as the high "cost of sales" and "administrative expenses", which bring the turnover of £541,597 down to profit before tax of £31,174, so it appears that they only pay a tiny amount of tax. Really? For a firm operating in the digital space with seemingly very few employees?

Has anyone so far asked Companies House for a detailed copy of their company accounts?

Also the detailed picture may give a clue what portion of their claim money received they pass on to Reuters etc., so we can see if they operate a profit share with these companies and what % they work on. They seem to try to pretend high license fees and do a profit share on that? Knowing that if a case was to go to court, they typically can only claim for the license fee. They can't openly say half the claim money is for them as that would get quoshed surely?

Thoughts?

{the above is all purely opinion and questions}

[tackler7]

I don't think you can infer anything relevant to your concerns from their accounts.

The company, because of its size, only has to supply limited information to both Companies House and HMRC. A member of the public is entitled to see the former via their website but not the latter. HMRC could ask for further information to test the details but that information is confidential.

What the accounts don't show is the contractual arrangements between the company and the photographers they represent.

For example they may take x% of any money received, even if that is just payment of a genuine licence fee (I. E. not inflated or including any extra costs).