When Audit Trails Protect Businesses, Not Contractors: A Critique of Professional Passport’s JSL Approach

As the countdown to the 2026 Joint and Several Liability (JSL) rules begins, Professional Passport has been vocal about its proposed “audit trail” solution. The premise is simple: by routing PAYE payments directly to HMRC while still under the umbrella’s tax reference, agencies can supposedly safeguard themselves from liability.

On the surface, it sounds like a fix. But scratch deeper and the flaws are obvious—not only in the mechanics of the system but in the motivation behind it.

1. An Audit Trail Doesn’t Stop Liability

Under JSL, liability is collective. Even a perfect audit trail cannot erase exposure if HMRC believes wrongdoing has occurred further down the chain. In fact, history shows that even the most sophisticated paperwork doesn’t stop HMRC from clawing back unpaid liabilities from those deemed to have “benefited,” regardless of intent.

2. The Two-Payment Process Adds Risk, Not Protection

Professional Passport’s model forces agencies to split payments—net pay and VAT one way, PAYE another. Each additional step is another opportunity for mismatches, errors, and disputes. The promised protection could evaporate the moment a payment is late, misallocated, or incorrectly referenced.

3. Accreditation Hasn’t Prevented Non-Compliance Before

Even umbrellas with Professional Passport accreditation have been found engaged in aggressive tax avoidance schemes. Accreditation has never been a bulletproof guarantee of compliance. If anything, accreditations have been an enabler and HMRC has repeatedly shown it will look past “badges of approval” and pursue liabilities regardless.

4. A Commercial Lifeline, Not an Industry Fix

This is where the uncomfortable question arises: who really benefits from Professional Passport’s approach?

Crawford Temple has built a business around accreditation. But if JSL makes accreditation less relevant—because liability is unavoidable no matter what—then his entire model is under threat. Agencies may rightly ask: why pay for accreditation when HMRC can still hold us liable?

By promoting this dual-payment audit trail as the “only route to protection,” Temple may not just be addressing compliance. He may be shoring up Professional Passport’s relevance in a landscape that could otherwise make it obsolete. In other words, this could be less about safeguarding agencies and more about safeguarding his own business model.

5. The Room for Non-Compliance Remains

Even with the proposed system:

• Fraudulent payslips can still be issued.
• Umbrellas can still disguise avoidance behind compliant-looking paperwork.
• Insolvent or rogue umbrellas can still collapse, leaving agencies exposed.

The hard truth is that Professional Passport’s “trail” doesn’t close the gaps—it just papers over them.

Conclusion: A Self-Serving Fix That Misses the Point

The upcoming JSL regime demands structural reform and airtight enforcement, not another layer of admin designed to look like protection.

Professional Passport’s audit-trail system may be less about shielding agencies and more about ensuring its own continued relevance. After all, if accreditation can’t stop tax avoidance, why would agencies keep paying for it once JSL bites?

The uncomfortable reality is this: the audit trail won’t stop HMRC from chasing liabilities, and it won’t eliminate non-compliance in the umbrella sector. It might, however, help Professional Passport keep its doors open—by selling the illusion of protection in a market that’s fast outgrowing it.