• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Crackdown on personal service companies could raise £400m in tax

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Crackdown on personal service companies could raise £400m in tax

    Originally posted by BrilloPad View Post
    Who are their masters? The government is being run by HMRC. Is HMRC run by the master? Or maybe GALs?

    The question will be how many contractors are forced into permanency. Whether by their own choice or by the client.

    And how many contractors being forced into permanency will satisfy them?

    HMRC do not seem to want a dynamic workforce.

    HMRC or the Government dont want a dynamic workforce. What they want is for all their citizens to be little worker drones on PAYE with a mortgage and HP on their car. That way they have control of you

    Comment


      Originally posted by pjt View Post
      They wont need to go to battle with the multi nationals as the multi nationals will mitigate risk and deem us SDC. Someone on the IPSE forums already been hit with a contract that deems this. Seems the balls already rolling on this.
      You've got to wonder then at what point business will step in over all of this. They clearly don't want this burden or expense and as a result I can just see companies not bothering with contractors. Just talking to my partner who heads up an IT arm of a managed services firm ad she said that if these rules came in, they just wouldn't bother using UK contractors, they would outsource more and more of it offshore.

      I think some firms will just look for permies instead, after all why would they want this headache.

      Great work Osborne......that'll help your tax take. Got to wonder why somebody thinks a degree in modern history gives them any basis to run the countries finances.....f'ing clown.

      Oh.....have you heard the one where Goerge Osbornes family sold property to an offshore fund:

      George Osborne family business' £6m offshore deal - Channel 4 News

      I can't stand hypocrites............

      Comment


        If your dad murders someone, can we send you to jail since you're related to him?
        Originally posted by MaryPoppins
        I'd still not breastfeed a nazi
        Originally posted by vetran
        Urine is quite nourishing

        Comment


          Originally posted by MrO666 View Post
          You've got to wonder then at what point business will step in over all of this. They clearly don't want this burden or expense and as a result I can just see companies not bothering with contractors. Just talking to my partner who heads up an IT arm of a managed services firm ad she said that if these rules came in, they just wouldn't bother using UK contractors, they would outsource more and more of it offshore.
          And maybe that is exactly what the government want!

          Comment


            For me, it's up to the agencies to step in and brief their clients about the impacts of this once the Autumn Statement has been broadcasted, digested and understood. We may find that all contracts are suddenly set to end in March 2017 until the clientco determines strategy - the agencies on their PSL could brief them about IR35-friendly options.

            More to the point, WTF is a PSC?
            The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world that he didn't exist

            Comment


              Originally posted by pjt View Post
              They wont need to go to battle with the multi nationals as the multi nationals will mitigate risk and deem us SDC. Someone on the IPSE forums already been hit with a contract that deems this. Seems the balls already rolling on this.
              This is probably how it will pan out. In Switzerland the client will only take you on through a payroll company for example, so you have no choice. They do also have "real contractors" but the legal beagles have to approve it.

              In the payroll you have a contract very similar to a UK umbrella co, where it ends when the contract ends so to speak.

              Effectively everyone is pushed through approved umbrella/payroll companies as a condition.

              You won't have any employment rights at the client, if then with the payroll company, but of course once the client contract has ended they can easily justify redundancy in the case you were to sue for employment rights, and then you get your 2 day redundancy entitlement.

              Just basically transferring my experience of contracting through payrolls in Luxembourg and Switzerland, oh and you do get "holiday" of course. That is subtracted from the contract rate and paid out to you.
              I'm alright Jack

              Comment


                Originally posted by GB9 View Post
                I very much doubt the majority of contracts will be ftc. Current client would have to offer 150 of them for 3 months at a time and they won't.

                Additionally they just won't get the people they require.

                They will lose 3 of the project team if T&S goes.
                The agencies will adapt and FTCs are already widely used, but it's difficult to predict the trade-off between direct employment, sourcing of employed workers via an agency, and sourcing of services through a major consultancy. In some industries, they'll just bring in the major consultancies instead. What's clear is that the contracting market will change dramatically if clients/agents are gatekeepers and liable for employment taxes and penalties.

                Comment


                  Originally posted by jamesbrown View Post
                  The agencies will adapt and FTCs are already widely used, but it's difficult to predict the trade-off between direct employment, sourcing of employed workers via an agency, and sourcing of services through a major consultancy. In some industries, they'll just bring in the major consultancies instead. What's clear is that the contracting market will change dramatically if clients/agents are gatekeepers and liable for employment taxes and penalties.
                  Well if that does happen we are screwed. Ftc at half contract rate with no real benefits. Day rate through umbrella I could cope with.

                  As mentioned though, client has c150 day rate contractors and they aren't going on the payroll.

                  Comment


                    Originally posted by d000hg View Post
                    If your dad murders someone, can we send you to jail since you're related to him?
                    I'd be willing to bet that if you got hold of George Osbornes tax return for the year that the property was sold, then it would more than likely show he had a stake in the "family" business.

                    Just stinks that's all.

                    Comment


                      Originally posted by jmo21 View Post
                      And maybe that is exactly what the government want!
                      Why would the government want £0 in tax ?

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X