"Consultation" on Employment Intermediaries and Tax Relief for Travel and Subsistence

[mudskipper]

And supervision could mean almost anything. The examples Eek gave of the prime minister and Chief Exec are invalid as they are not 'a business in their own right'. Are you a PM ? Do you attend a programme board to update a Programme Manager on your projects' progress ? Are you a test manager and have to update a Prg test manager on your progress ? Do you build desktops and have to tell someone when the latest batch is ready ? Can any of these people you report to make any changes of any type to what you are going to do next ? That is supervision, that is. Or at least, it will be when this consultation is complete.

Anyone who thinks that contractors are not a target is deluded.

ESM2057 - Agency and temporary workers: agency legislation - provisions from 6 April 2014: supervision, direction or control example - IT consultant

The two examples given are poles apart. Most of us fall somewhere in the middle.

[TheCoconutDog]

ESM2057 - Agency and temporary workers: agency legislation - provisions from 6 April 2014: supervision, direction or control example - IT consultant

The two examples given are poles apart. Most of us fall somewhere in the middle.

Agree with what you're saying, but I think these examples indicate that Contractors are firmly in the crosshairs of this legislation and it's not just a case of being caught in the crossfire.

[eek]

And supervision could mean almost anything. The examples Eek gave of the prime minister and Chief Exec are invalid as they are not 'a business in their own right'. Are you a PM ? Do you attend a programme board to update a Programme Manager on your projects' progress ? Are you a test manager and have to update a Prg test manager on your progress ? Do you build desktops and have to tell someone when the latest batch is ready ? Can any of these people you report to make any changes of any type to what you are going to do next ? That is supervision, that is. Or at least, it will be when this consultation is complete.

Anyone who thinks that contractors are not a target is deluded.

My point was that anyone who wasn't the prime minister or a chief executive is under the broad definition of supervision, direction or control..

[TestMangler]

ESM2057 - Agency and temporary workers: agency legislation - provisions from 6 April 2014: supervision, direction or control example - IT consultant

The two examples given are poles apart. Most of us fall somewhere in the middle.

And IR35 was there to stop perm employees from becoming self employed on Monday

[TestMangler]

My point was that anyone who wasn't the prime minister or a chief executive is under the broad definition of supervision, direction or control..

And that point is well understood And you've just made HMRC's argument for them. All contractors are under supervision in some way and anyone (ok, virtually anyone) on here who claims to be completely independent while using the ltd/agency/client model is lying to themselves.

[centurian]

ESM2057 - Agency and temporary workers: agency legislation - provisions from 6 April 2014: supervision, direction or control example - IT consultant

The two examples given are poles apart. Most of us fall somewhere in the middle.

Yep - it didn't help that for the same base scenario (an IT consultant), they then decided on two, totally opposite sub-scenarios.

I suspect most people are closer to scenario 2 than scenario 1 though. But how far away do you have to be from scenario 2 to be clear of the legislation - these examples give no help at all in determining that.

[Goatfell]

The two examples given are poles apart. Most of us fall somewhere in the middle.

ESM2057 snip
"The Directors then tell Paul he has a completely free role to design and build the website as he sees fit, without anyone being able to intervene to instruct Paul what the website must look like or how it must be created."

Yeah right, that either shows the civil service mindset, "Build a website in whatever manner you wish, we don't care what it looks like or whether it does anything - just invoice us when you're done...", or it shows just how far they're willing to go to invent nonsensical definitions to suit their intentions.

I've never come across any private sector client, no matter how hands-off they are, give someone free-rein like that, has anyone?

Comparing it to the old plumber scenario, I want a kitchen and bathroom installed:
- we agree a design
- we agree on style and materials
- we agree a timescale
- we agree a cost.
I wouldn't tell him whether to use compression or push-on fittings but I certainly would object to him fitting a cooker hood above the shower (well, it's an extractor innit).

[daemon]

So with £2,500 a month expenses (flights, accommodation, taxis, subsistence) i'm fairly stuffed?

Looks like i'd pay an extra £1100 or so per month in tax @ 40%, being within IR35.

[unixman]

FUD. If you employ or engage anyone in any way, you are supervising them in some way. I don't tell the garage how to service my car, but then again I do, because if I want the wipers replacing too I will tell them to replace the wipers. That's direction. If I buy a newspaper from the shop, I tell the lady what I want, watch while she provides it, and check that it is provided correctly. Supervision. If I hire a builder to do me a conservatory, I supervise him throughout, direct him not to walk through my kitchen, agree when he will be on site and direct him to use yellow tiles. Control.

However, it could also be argued the other way. The garage will charge extra for the wipers, the builder may also be building stuff for others, and so on. Hence, these "direction, supervision, control" concepts are inagequate, deliberately woolly to provide a layer of FUD rather than clarity.

If the gov wants to make contracting better, they may be right in seeking to modify the behavior of the client rather than the contractors. Perhaps we will all end up charging a huge lump sum rather then a daily rate, and having full, clear works descriptions in our contracts, which will be fine with me and make contracting more exciting. Sorry for the rambling.

[eek]

Yeah right, that either shows the civil service mindset, "Build a website in whatever manner you wish, we don't care what it looks like or whether it does anything - just invoice us when you're done...", or it shows just how far they're willing to go to invent nonsensical definitions to suit their intentions.

I've never come across any private sector client, no matter how hands-off they are, give someone free-rein like that, has anyone?

Comparing it to the old plumber scenario, I want a kitchen and bathroom installed:
- we agree a design
- we agree on style and materials
- we agree a timescale
- we agree a cost.
I wouldn't tell him whether to use compression or push-on fittings but I certainly would object to him fitting a cooker hood above the shower (well, it's an extractor innit).

The plumber would fail supervision when as a tester I switch the tap on and discover a leak in the pipework.

And believe it or not the description is that broad. A cosmetic company rep telling a self employed sales person about the products the rep represents falls into supervision looking at the talentcore case