Opinions on IR35 and its impact on contractors?
Discussion
JPJPJP said:
If those advantages are taken away and the work needs doing, another solution will emerge
Either a contracting organisation that charges more, to cover the impact of the tax or someone on payroll
If it costs the organisation more to get the work done and or the people doing the work earn less, hey ho. Life will likely go on
This is how a lot of the offshore, loans and employee trusts schemes came about when they first introduced IR35 years ago, loads of people moved to them and now they are all those schemes have been targeted its a mess.Either a contracting organisation that charges more, to cover the impact of the tax or someone on payroll
If it costs the organisation more to get the work done and or the people doing the work earn less, hey ho. Life will likely go on
daemon said:
Post April role is inside IR35 purely because the HR department applied a blanket approach.
I have correspondence from senior decision makers in the local authority deeming the role outside IR35, and correspondence subsequently saying there is a blanket approach deeming all roles inside IR35.
I'd hang on to that letter if I were you!I have correspondence from senior decision makers in the local authority deeming the role outside IR35, and correspondence subsequently saying there is a blanket approach deeming all roles inside IR35.
Edited by daemon on Monday 20th November 11:33
It may not change your case, but you should probably do some reading on the 'reasonable care' clause from the finance bill. Blanket statements are not allowed and due care of assessment must be made.
Autopilot said:
I'd hang on to that letter if I were you!
It may not change your case, but you should probably do some reading on the 'reasonable care' clause from the finance bill. Blanket statements are not allowed and due care of assessment must be made.
Oh I intend to. The email trail and letters make very interesting reading.It may not change your case, but you should probably do some reading on the 'reasonable care' clause from the finance bill. Blanket statements are not allowed and due care of assessment must be made.
For the avoidance of doubt, there is no "case"
daemon said:
Autopilot said:
I'd hang on to that letter if I were you!
It may not change your case, but you should probably do some reading on the 'reasonable care' clause from the finance bill. Blanket statements are not allowed and due care of assessment must be made.
Oh I intend to. The email trail and letters make very interesting reading.It may not change your case, but you should probably do some reading on the 'reasonable care' clause from the finance bill. Blanket statements are not allowed and due care of assessment must be made.
For the avoidance of doubt, there is no "case"
They completely forgot to try and see the bigger picture and understand what it will do to their hired workforce and as McEric says, there doesn't seem to be any examples out there of anybody being able to fight if the decision puts them inside if they shouldn't be so no precedence has been set.
I was chatting to a friend before the legislation change was implemented and he said the organisation he was at were going to make a blanket decision of inside IR35. His organisation aren't subject to FOI so suggested he should probably take that up with them!
Autopilot said:
One of the biggest issues has been that organisations don't understand the legislation but do understand the risks to them if somebody's status is deemed to be incorrect hence the desire to make blanket decisions of inside.
They completely forgot to try and see the bigger picture and understand what it will do to their hired workforce and as McEric says, there doesn't seem to be any examples out there of anybody being able to fight if the decision puts them inside if they shouldn't be so no precedence has been set.
I was chatting to a friend before the legislation change was implemented and he said the organisation he was at were going to make a blanket decision of inside IR35. His organisation aren't subject to FOI so suggested he should probably take that up with them!
It's not really surprising that so few clients are interested in helping freelancers stay outside IR35. Up until now they have no incentive or risk to involve them - it's literally not been their problem. Perhaps an incentive will evolve, inasmuch as a freelancer outside IR35 work out cheaper than one inside, and market forces will win out. They completely forgot to try and see the bigger picture and understand what it will do to their hired workforce and as McEric says, there doesn't seem to be any examples out there of anybody being able to fight if the decision puts them inside if they shouldn't be so no precedence has been set.
I was chatting to a friend before the legislation change was implemented and he said the organisation he was at were going to make a blanket decision of inside IR35. His organisation aren't subject to FOI so suggested he should probably take that up with them!
As I said in a previous post, had IR35 had been legislated so that employment status for tax purposes was indivisible from employment status for protections and benefits, you can be sure that clients would have been fighting tooth and nail against it as hard as freelancers have been. HMRC knew that, which is why it was legislated so they could have their cake and eat it, and so that clients carried none of the risk and contractors carried all of it. And now they are coercing clients into doing their dirty work for them by disincentivising them from helping freelancers stay outside IR35 by pushing some risk onto the client in such a way as a blanket "inside IR35" is the easy option.
Edited by Clockwork Cupcake on Monday 20th November 17:34
Autopilot said:
One of the biggest issues has been that organisations don't understand the legislation but do understand the risks to them if somebody's status is deemed to be incorrect hence the desire to make blanket decisions of inside.
They completely forgot to try and see the bigger picture and understand what it will do to their hired workforce and as McEric says, there doesn't seem to be any examples out there of anybody being able to fight if the decision puts them inside if they shouldn't be so no precedence has been set.
The Locum Doctors' Union are having a good go.They completely forgot to try and see the bigger picture and understand what it will do to their hired workforce and as McEric says, there doesn't seem to be any examples out there of anybody being able to fight if the decision puts them inside if they shouldn't be so no precedence has been set.
HannsG said:
Looks like it's 2020.
Cue the doom and gloom! I'll still be contracting regardless.
f
k them
The one and only glimmer of light is that if a client says you are inside IR35 then they have to pay Employer's NI for you. That might just be enough incentive to get them to co-operate. Cue the doom and gloom! I'll still be contracting regardless.
f
k themClockwork Cupcake said:
HannsG said:
Looks like it's 2020.
Cue the doom and gloom! I'll still be contracting regardless.
fk them
The one and only glimmer of light is that if a client says you are inside IR35 then they have to pay Employer's NI for you. That might just be enough incentive to get them to co-operate. Cue the doom and gloom! I'll still be contracting regardless.
f
k them
Prolex-UK said:
Ironic thing is I am public Sector saw caught by IR35 (blanket approach) but a colleague left my authority in April 2017 to work in the House of Commons as a PM on the digital transformation project and was deemed to be outside of IR35 by the HofC HR people...........
QDOS Website said:
The IR35 legislation states the need for public sector engagers to take ‘reasonable care’ when setting a contractor’s status. While ‘reasonable care’ is hard to define specifically, blanket IR35 decisions are neither reasonable nor caring, and therefore should be considered non-compliant
https://www.qdoscontractor.com/news/2018/05/09/blanket-ir35-determinationsWhatever is decided, the market will sort itself out somehow. As contractors we will undoubtedly be worse off financially, and it might just tip the balance for many to return to perm. Which, of course, is what the government (and the big body shops who are lobbying them) have wanted all along.
Personally, I think this is incredibly short-sighted. What the country really needs right now, more than ever with Brexit looming, is a flexible workforce.
Personally, I think this is incredibly short-sighted. What the country really needs right now, more than ever with Brexit looming, is a flexible workforce.
Autopilot said:
Prolex-UK said:
Ironic thing is I am public Sector saw caught by IR35 (blanket approach) but a colleague left my authority in April 2017 to work in the House of Commons as a PM on the digital transformation project and was deemed to be outside of IR35 by the HofC HR people...........
QDOS Website said:
The IR35 legislation states the need for public sector engagers to take ‘reasonable care’ when setting a contractor’s status. While ‘reasonable care’ is hard to define specifically, blanket IR35 decisions are neither reasonable nor caring, and therefore should be considered non-compliant
https://www.qdoscontractor.com/news/2018/05/09/blanket-ir35-determinationsThe council is so risk averse i was wasting my time
I couldn't function again as a permie. I mostly have had the one client for a long time now but it's not unusual for me to take 6 months off in a year when the work just isn't available. And if I leave the house it's for a meeting, never a whole day.
The second anyone mentioned an appraisal or OKR I'd be flipping my desk over and flouncing off. Probably best if HMRC don't rely on any increased tax take from that.
The second anyone mentioned an appraisal or OKR I'd be flipping my desk over and flouncing off. Probably best if HMRC don't rely on any increased tax take from that.
Autopilot said:
Prolex-UK said:
Ironic thing is I am public Sector saw caught by IR35 (blanket approach) but a colleague left my authority in April 2017 to work in the House of Commons as a PM on the digital transformation project and was deemed to be outside of IR35 by the HofC HR people...........
QDOS Website said:
The IR35 legislation states the need for public sector engagers to take ‘reasonable care’ when setting a contractor’s status. While ‘reasonable care’ is hard to define specifically, blanket IR35 decisions are neither reasonable nor caring, and therefore should be considered non-compliant
https://www.qdoscontractor.com/news/2018/05/09/blanket-ir35-determinations768 said:
I couldn't function again as a permie. I mostly have had the one client for a long time now but it's not unusual for me to take 6 months off in a year when the work just isn't available. And if I leave the house it's for a meeting, never a whole day.
The second anyone mentioned an appraisal or OKR I'd be flipping my desk over and flouncing off. Probably best if HMRC don't rely on any increased tax take from that.
Totally agree. The second anyone mentioned an appraisal or OKR I'd be flipping my desk over and flouncing off. Probably best if HMRC don't rely on any increased tax take from that.
I've been a little spoiled for the past few years - I've done a lot of remote working, and the time I have spent in an office has been a very laid-back one.
Clockwork Cupcake said:
I think this is incredibly short-sighted. What the country really needs right now, more than ever with Brexit looming, is a flexible workforce.
A permie can give notice and move jobs. They can also take two, three or more jobs st the same time and they can be fixed term or permanent. Not sure how that is any different for a contractor or permanent member of staff.
Gassing Station | Business | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff