Very worrying - the expenses thing

[TheCyclingProgrammer]

No the fact you pay tax on £24k more bit. I haven't looked in to this to be honest so maybe I'd be better not saying anything until I've understood it. Ignore me.

If his annual expenses are £24k then that would have been tax deductible under current rules but potentially not under new ones.

Also, given you normally take expenses on top of your usual salary/dividend combo, so as not to impact your personal finances, you'd probably be paying higher rate tax on it too!

[Jog On]

Is there any clarity as to what constitutes SDC and what doesn't?

In current gig we (myself and other contractors) are pretty much defining the governance and are completely left to get on with delivering our deliverables - end client tells us what they want, we go away and do it (however we see fit) then report milestones etc...

I can haz T&S expenses or no?

We are based on client site... day rate is subject to an 'average' length day of 8.5 hours.

How are they going to measure and enforce this and will it be worth their while even investigating it?

[jamesbrown]

Let's face it, there's a good chance that SD&C will (continue to) factor more prominently in future policy. I have my doubts about whether this can be achieved through son-of-IR35, as the attributes of employment are (have been) decided by the courts. You can't just throw out RoS and MoO. On the other hand, SD&C may factor prominently in qualifying criteria for future tax reliefs, just like expenses, only for dividend taxes, for example. More emphasis on SD&C isn't necessarily a bad thing IMO, and it will still ultimately be decided by the courts, which is why IR35 has always been manageable, with some due diligence. A little perspective is needed here, and it's worth remembering that the authors of these articles typically have vested interests. It won't be easy for the gov't to materially change the landscape for employment status without major indirect impacts (they've tried before).

[jamesbrown]

Is there any clarity as to what constitutes SDC and what doesn't?

http://www.accountaxconsulting.com/D...taxWebsite.pdf

[TheCoconutDog]

http://www.accountaxconsulting.com/D...taxWebsite.pdf

All of the 12 examples in that document assume no ""Personal Service Company" in the chain (penultimate paragraph on page 3). Is this significant ?

[BolshieBastard]

So how does it work if I live in Reading, my contract is based at, say Farnborough, and I need to go to Swansea for a meeting/server room build out? Can I claim T+S from Farnborough to Swansea?

Assuming this is the case, what happens if I'm based at home, and need to go to Farnborough some days and Swansea some others? It all just smacks of not being thought out.

The obvious answer would seem to be that all new 'T+S friendly' contracts will be 'Based at the consultant's registered offices, with occasional travel to sites as deemed necessary from time to time.'

apparently not (claim for your other meeting) according to some info I read on another contractor site.

And, like IR35, a DC&S differently worded contract wont cut it either as its the working practicalities that will be the decider.

They've really got smart here (from their perspective) but, goes against everything for a 'mobile workforce' never mind being the party for self improvement, businesses blah, blah, blah.

Dont blame me, I never voted for the twats but look likely to be clobbered unless the measure is talked down.

[BolshieBastard]

All of the 12 examples in that document assume no ""Personal Service Company" in the chain (penultimate paragraph on page 3). Is this significant ?

No because in the document intermediaries includes umbrella's psc's etc.

Anyone thinking 'oh, its just a consultation exercise, nothing to worry about' is deluding themselves. The government wants to clamp down of the pisstake umbrella's have had over 'expenses.' Only they're going to clobber PSC's as well if this goes through.

[mudskipper]

Is there any clarity as to what constitutes SDC and what doesn't?

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

Clear as mud.

[mudskipper]

No, the HMRC consultation has always said "or", it's the people that write articles and headlines like this that say "and" that are confusing the issue.

We need better accountants and article writers.

As TheCoconutDog spotted when diligently trawling through unreadable legislation, the difference is

Outside IR35 if NOT subject to supervision, direction or control.

Can't claim expenses if subject to supervision, direction or control.

The NOT makes all the difference - i.e. you are outside IR35 unless subject to all of supervision, direction AND control.

for TCD.

[eek]

As TheCoconutDog spotted when diligently trawling through unreadable legislation, the difference is

Outside IR35 if NOT subject to supervision, direction or control.

Can't claim expenses if subject to supervision, direction or control.

The NOT makes all the difference - i.e. you are outside IR35 unless subject to all of supervision, direction AND control.

for TCD.

So basically we need it changed to Expenses can be claimed if not subject to supervision, direction or control.

we have something that might be achievable...