Worst case scenario

[eek]

I'm not knocking Lisa (hello Lisa) but her question referred to a piece of legislation aimed at umbrellas, not Ltd. I thank her for raising the point and the answer given by HMRC may well be exactly the same as for my question. However, Mudskipper stated the clause in question and rightly asked how that can be applicable to us. My question would have clarified that.

I also agree with Boredbloke that we need a good representative trade group similar to the BRC that would really come out and shout on our behalf. I raised this when we had the Lords committed but was told by several people that the PC would cover our position. Needless to say they were ignored and I'm glad I made my own contribution instead.

You missed a piece of feature creep that may make it about us...

The original expenses discussion document explicitly excluded us by not mentioning PSCs.

We then have the S44 regulations at about the same time that explicitly excluded us.

Now the consultation document refers to us and then to simplify things HMRC has explicitly suggested the use of S44 as the basis of the decision (to simplify things). However the explicit exemption of PSCs from S44 was not repeated and its not clear within the wording of that document that PSCs are excluded (that's only in separate guidance). So while its possible (even probably) that PSCs may be exempted from the rules we need to check the assumption.

As for not trusting anyone to provide a sensible coherent response, why do you think I'm running a survey (260+ answers now).. But we do have a group to represent us (the PCG). They just thought they had better things to do with their time...

Ironically I see people on the IPSE forums are joking about creating another group to fit the expense changes..... At least I hope they are joking....

[TykeMerc]

As for not trusting anyone to provide a sensible coherent response, why do you think I'm running a survey (260+ answers now).. But we do have a group to represent us (the PCG). They just thought they had better things to do with their time...

Ironically I see people on the IPSE forums are joking about creating another group to fit the expense changes..... At least I hope they are joking....

If you think that bunch of self important, arrogant clowns with their own agenda who "officially" regarded IR35 as dead are representative of the contractor community then you need to lay off the funny tobacco.

They only claim a mandate because twenty? thirty? thousand contractors are "members" when in reality they are insurance customers.

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

Meanwhile, the 'skills shortages' show no sign of abating.

IT contractor pay 'exceeding what hirers can afford' :: Contractor UK



What timelines do you foresee for their implementation? 2016 for T&S and 2017 for IR35 changes, if any?

Yep that would make sense

[eek]

If you think that bunch of self important, arrogant clowns with their own agenda who "officially" regarded IR35 as dead are representative of the contractor community then you need to lay off the funny tobacco.

They only claim a mandate because twenty? thirty? thousand contractors are "members" when in reality they are insurance customers.

Again, Why do you think I'm running the survey...

The question I was responding to was do we have a trade body to which the answer is that we do/did.

Granted it's got an agenda that isn't ours and has been as effective as a chocolate teapot ( they usually work once and pcg won the arctic case) but it was set up with the express purpose of representing us, its just forgotten it's purpose over the years.

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

I'm not knocking Lisa (hello Lisa) but her question referred to a piece of legislation aimed at umbrellas, not Ltd. I thank her for raising the point and the answer given by HMRC may well be exactly the same as for my question. However, Mudskipper stated the clause in question and rightly asked how that can be applicable to us. My question would have clarified that.

I also agree with Boredbloke that we need a good representative trade group similar to the BRC that would really come out and shout on our behalf. I raised this when we had the Lords committed but was told by several people that the PC would cover our position. Needless to say they were ignored and I'm glad I made my own contribution instead.

Hello Just to clarify - from the consultation document:

"The Government is proposing to remove tax relief for ordinary commuting (in general, home to work travel and subsistence expenses) for workers who are:

Supplying personal services
Engaged through an employment intermediary (including umbrella companies, certain employment businesses and personal service companies) and
subject (or to the right of) supervision or direction or control of any person

[jamesbrown]

Hello Just to clarify - from the consultation document:

"The Government is proposing to remove tax relief for ordinary commuting (in general, home to work travel and subsistence expenses) for workers who are:

Supplying personal services
Engaged through an employment intermediary (including umbrella companies, certain employment businesses and personal service companies) and
subject (or to the right of) supervision or direction or control of any person

Yup. I think GB9 is confused about the scope creep that happened between discussion and consultation. Understandable, given the earlier assurances Expect the IR35 consultation to look completely different to the discussion document However, I'm pretty sure it will still include SDC and client engagement

[MicrosoftBob]

I love the terminology used in the article...
As to demand on a regional basis, London is seeing the biggest “demand spikes” for software engineering, in contrast to tech support and web development, which declined in the capital.

Oh but wait... isn't web development a subset/specialisation of software engineering

While I'm splitting hairs isn't this just another skills shortage scare story...

Don't worry bob consultancies will be charging to the rescue crying Tally Ho soon enough

[mudskipper]

An update from the IPSE CEO on their survey - there's been c2,500 responses so far. I know I feel encouraged that so many people are engaged/incensed enough to make their views known. I'd hope that the fact that there are so many responses across the three surveys will, in itself, send a message about how problematic this is.

Edit: if you haven't already, please do so here

[jamesbrown]

An update from the IPSE CEO on their survey - there's been c2,500 responses so far. I know I feel encouraged that so many people are engaged/incensed enough to make their views known. I'd hope that the fact that there are so many responses across the three surveys will, in itself, send a message about how problematic this is.

Edit: if you haven't already, please do so here

Except Gauke can't count. 1, 2, 3, 43,232, 5

[GB9]

Yup. I think GB9 is confused about the scope creep that happened between discussion and consultation. Understandable, given the earlier assurances Expect the IR35 consultation to look completely different to the discussion document However, I'm pretty sure it will still include SDC and client engagement

Too right I'm confused.

I would just like HMRC to come out with a clear statement saying 'by default, all psc engaged through an intermediary will be deemed as under sdc' or not.

Yes, pigs will fly.

And how they could describe me as under SDC of anyone is beyond me.