Keith Clarke

Behind the scenes, though, full and frank discussions are taking place between orchestra representatives and Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs. (For those who somehow missed the whole thing, the Revenue has come to the view that orchestras should be paying Class 1 national insurance contributions for all their players, raising the spectre of a £33m bill amid talk of multiple closures.) We shall be returning to the subject before long, with a comprehensive story-so-far piece and reaction from around the business.

So far, most of the reactions are of the stunned 'bloody hell' variety. It is not surprising. For the whole thing is a grisly mess. The Revenue's black-and-white Give us the money is in stark contrast to the many shades of grey which are revealed when you begin to look beneath the surface of the story.

You'll also find other articles about the issue if you click the following links
MU Petition Text  •  CM Tax Bombshell Briefing  •  NFMS Tax Bombshell Briefing  •  links index -> 33 Million Tax Bill

As an act of selfless public service, I read the Revenue's fascinating 'Guidelines on the Special NIC Rules for Entertainers', but am not much the wiser. The eyes glaze over almost as swiftly as they do with an opera synopsis. But one thing is clear: there is much to play for from the orchestras' point of view, since the whole thing seems to hang on interpretation of some nebulous definitions. Session musicians, for instance, are exempt from the new ruling. But how do you define session musician?

The revenue does it for us: Session musicians is a term which describes the elite group of musicians who did not pay Class 1 NICCs prior to July 1998. Helpful, that. We are going to need a bit more of a definition if we are to work out the extent of these new liabilities. If a chap turns up now and again to bash the gong, then, the orchestra does not have to fork out for his national insurance. But it does have to make the payments for its regularly contracted staff.

So where does that leave pick-up bands? Are all their players 'session musicians' under this ruling, even if they work regularly with that band? When a player does a rehearsal for one band in the morning and a concert for another in the evening, who is liable for that day's contribution? Pass me a couple more Anadin, nurse.

In fairness to the Revenue (yes, it pains me to type that), the new ruling was an attempt to allow entertainers to claim Jobseekers' Allowance while they are out of work. But there are entertainers and entertainers. While the vast majority of jobbing actors spend an awful lot of time 'resting', musicians can generally pick up as much work as they can handle. The on-size-fits-all approach is dodgy. And if an attempt to provide benefits results in work disappearing as orchestras crack under the new financial demands, who benefits?

Meanwhile, there is one of those pleasing twists to the story. For while the Association of British Orchestras worthies have been gracing the early morning airwaves and generally kicking up a fuss, at least one orchestral manager is pouring cold water on the whole episode, saying it would have been far better to keep quite about it and just get on with the negotiations. Oh whoops, a crack in the wall. Don't start arguing among yourselves, chaps. United we stand and all that.

Keith Clarke, CM 19th November 2005,
published with the kind permission of Classical Music.

this article is copyright protected. Morgensterns is licensed to reproduce it. No further copying is permitted without Morgensterns or the author's permission