Accounting services for contractors (3 sources)

Every row is a verbatim sentence read from the named source's own page through our fetch service on the date shown, hash-pinned to the stored read (the sha of the page's visible text; the raw page is mirrored to R2).

3 of the 18 named sources that could be read published a usable figure; 15 published none and are recorded as not published, never filled in; 0 could not be read (blocked, dead or unreachable) and count nowhere.

The headline figures (median, minimum, maximum, quartiles) are over ONE figure per source in GBP (a source's median where its page yielded several accepted sentences), so N counts sources, never sentences; 102 candidate sentence(s) were refused by a reviewer with the reason recorded.

The fuller derivation this dataset is chartered to grow into (not yet what the figures above are; they are each source's own published figure as read): the median, minimum and maximum published fee across every UK firm that publishes one, normalised to pounds per month excluding VAT because the market quotes monthly, annually, per return and as a percentage of a refund against the same work; cut by client type (sole trader, CIS subcontractor, limited company contractor), by what the fee includes (year-end accounts, corporation tax, VAT, payroll, self assessment, the accounting software licence, an IR35 contract review) and by pricing model - and the finding is the fourth model, the CIS rebate firms that charge a percentage of the refund with a floor rather than a monthly fee, which the monthly comparisons never sit beside; plus the share of firms that publish a fee at all, several of the best-known contractor brands now redirecting to one group page

102 candidate sentences on these pages were refused by a reviewer; each refusal and its reason is recorded in the review ledger.