IR35 - Guilty as charged! - Updated May 2016 - NOT GUILTY!

[GazCol]

Not sure. Seems to come down to two views:

1. Tip off to HMRC
2. HMRC looked at business where I'd contracted and I hear they found a contractor being paid direct into personal bank account.

My guess is 2. and they've drilled down to other contractors now.

Just to make sure I understand this right - you were/are being paid directly into your personal bank account? There's no other entity between you and the end client?

[northernladuk]

Oh dear oh dear. If there are basic mistakes being made on fundamental issues how many others are going to come out of the woodwork I wonder. Are these two contracts with the same client and have you only ever had one client?
You are aware of the 24 month rule? 😜

[tractor]

.

Just to make sure I understand this right - you were/are being paid directly into your personal bank account? There's no other entity between you and the end client?

The OP did day 'they found a contractor'

That is not quite the same as 'Me'

But for the avoidance of doubt OP, was it you???

[Munchers]

Just to make sure I understand this right - you were/are being paid directly into your personal bank account? There's no other entity between you and the end client?

No, another contractor was which HM caught and are fining the business- I suspect they weren't declaring this.

[northernladuk]

No, another contractor was which HM caught and are fining the business- I suspect they weren't declaring this.

I hope to god you don't have to submit any written evidence for your case.

[centurian]

To clarify, investigation only started about 6 weeks where they asked for info evidence to as to why I was outside IR35. They're looking at one year only but I was trying to establish my risk ie how many years.

Yes, they are only allowed to initially look back at the past year. However, if they find anything in that return (they have), they are allowed to look back over the past 6 years (sometimes longer, but I doubt that would apply).

I have had two contracts over the last 6 years. The last contract was rolled on every 6 months as I was asked to do more work. I realise now and accept this is a basic mistake, I should have got a new contract signed each time.

Ouch, that's not good

Okay, you may have to forget about Mutuality of Obligation - you may have torpedoed that one. Focus on the other two - Right of Substitution and Discretion & Control.

[tractor]

...

Yes, they are only allowed to initially look back at the past year. However, if they find anything in that return (they have), they are allowed to look back over the past 6 years (sometimes longer, but I doubt that would apply).



Ouch, that's not good

Okay, you may have to forget about Mutuality of Obligation - you may have torpedoed that one. Focus on the other two - Right of Substitution and Discretion & Control.

Direction and Control

MOO may not be a lost cause if there were any periods during that time where work was not offered or was not accepted. Depends on how the OP handled leave and sickness and WFH in practice.

[d000hg]

Discretion and Control

Few posting here seem to have much control.

[ChimpMaster]

So on a 'rolling' contract, don't you have to still sign a new contract? Or was it just like a 'statement of works' that you signed every 6 months?

Some good advice on CUK a while back led to me changing the contract terms and objectives every on renewal. I also do my best to ensure that the underlying day-to-day tasks change, as much as is realistic anyway.


As for MOO, for those contractors that take holidays mid-contract: when planning a holiday, rather than informing the client that you will be taking 2 weeks off in August etc, wouldn't it be a good idea to get the client to write an email to you advising that they have no work for you during August and won't need your services for those 2 weeks?

Edit: on the MOO question, this is like all the banks forcing contractors to have 10 consecutive days out of the office and off the network. I had to do this at the bank I was contracted at.

[Munchers]

I hope to god you don't have to submit any written evidence for your case.

As I've said we paid for a seperate tax consultant to write our submission. From which he argued our case based on MOO, right of substitute and Control. I might not know much about this but I know enough, to never talk to HMRC without professional advice!