Hi Again. Although there are some valid points raised here I'd like to point out one or two more, lesser known ones.
Sue, yes it is possible to apply for a deferment to your class 2 Nic. However upon trying myself I was informed it is deferred only if your annual gross taxable income is below that of government requirements. I played the motion that I thought that that only applied to the stamp duty we paid as a self employed entity and was told in no lengthy terms, "NO!" I suppose the hiring of an accountant would be a better way forward as they are more savvy in these matters than the rest of us, but then you're only paying money from one hand into another. It would of course, not be a problem, if we were on the wages earnings list of soap, Musical and film stars.
Regarding salaries.
Minimum wages? Although I have pointed out that, tours, seasons and runs of more than a week, and that pay on a weekly basis (this also includes tv series where a weekly payment plan occurs for it's cast and crew), both the company and each of it's members (cast and crew) must pay class2 NI contributions. However, when talking about a film, whether a blockbuster or no/lo budget is in place, it carries a lump sum policy where you only pay your regular NIC's on the sum earned. This is the misconception where there are no infringements on the minimum wage rights. It's like quoting for a conservatory or window, the builders or glaziers involved will give you a price, it's up to you which company you pick to do the job.
£5.50 an hour, most extras work in Kay Mellor dramas for £60 for 12hours, when the rate you mentioned would mean they should be paid at least £67, shame on the ITV for not realising their mistake here.
It's like this in every industry, the musicians union tried the keep music live approach after the influx of solo cabaret performers who used tracks, being undercut by almost a 3rd, then karaoke came in and undercut the solo performers who until that point were earning between £150 to £200 (incidentally the same base rate as a local covers band), offering their services for only £45 plus beer, as to them it was basically a night out for free! The only difference here however is it's actors undercutting other actors to get the role, the dog eat dog society of how low will you go. But this really started out when acting was a closed shop, the only place an actor could work back then was with independent film-makers, they were required to advertise in the proper way, but they held no ties with equity and could basically hire whoever they wanted.
This was the only way an actor, not from the traditional acting background, was able to gain an equity card.
While there are still people willing to work for little or no pay, there'll always be companies willing to exploit them. There's also the fact that it's terrifically hard to attain finance to budget a film, and some film-makers that want to make an impact, will invite generous artists to participate in their film project, though with these you will get expenses and a deferment offer of payment. To staunch these completely will be to cripple the new blood of film-makers who have the potential to carry us forward as an industry. The leaches who suck us dry however should be the ones we attack, those that abuse our generosity our talent and our trust. I may just apply for equity election if this is their idea of a way forward. It's minimalistic in it's aim and will surely damage the future of film in this country if there is no experienced training ground to support the imagery and artistry of a new breed of director/producer/film-maker that the British Film Industry is crying out for.
I hold fast on a database and film registry proposal, making it accessible to all cast and crew so they can make their own minds up whether they'll be exploited or creative in this field.
Thanks
Kenny