Bauer & Cottrell contract review - suggests I will never be outside IR35?!

[sociopath]

Would the Business As Usual element be anything to do with it? ? It might help clarifying this as BAU can often be considered as work that a staff member does on any day that is defined in there job description. And you did say that they said that the situation would change if that element was removed.

[northernladuk]

Would the Business As Usual element be anything to do with it? ? It might help clarifying this as BAU can often be considered as work that a staff member does on any day that is defined in there job description. And you did say that they said that the situation would change if that element was removed.

Where I don't think Zippy should be discussion his case on an open forum when it's on going with B&C I would be interested to know the outcome.

As far as I am aware the in the past being in an enduring role has it's risks but as long as you pass the main 3 tests of RoS, D&C and MoO and that the working practices meet a properly worded document you are as in the clear as you can be when it comes to IR35. I wasn't aware that certain positions automatically put you inside. If it did that's going to be a nightmare for anyone working in existing 1st, 2nd and possibly 3rd line teams for example. There was some discussion about whether social workers should be inside by default though I seem to remember.

Even though the role is enduring you could be filling in for maternity, covering busy periods and so on which surely are valid reasons for a contractor and doesn't automatically make them a disguised employee. There are enough people that have done 5+ years at clients who are (arguably) outside IR35 so a short term gig in a perm team shouldn't be an automatic inside flag.

I've a feeling the devil is in the details with this one as isn't as automatic as has been suggested so am intrigued.

[zippy.mini]

Apologies if you think I shouldn't be discussing this yet, but it has raised a lot of questions. The conversation I said I would have with the line manager was merely a stop gap I think to the final decision of putting me inside because I suspect when I talk to him, he will say that I am not just working on a specific project. This was the only thing that I was told could save me.
Therefore, as you say, this immediately puts all support staff inside no matter what. Which is contrary to a similar discussion I had a few years ago.

[northernladuk]

What I meant is that your discussions are ongoing with B&C who are the professionals so it's best to get to the bottom of it with them before getting to involved with us who dont know the details of the case. I'd give B&C a chance to get to the bottom of it first. Up to you though.

[BolshieBastard]

After being on Bauer & Cotterell's website, I note that they have stated they would "discuss and negotiate appropriate changes on your behalf directly with your agency/end client" (on their higher package), which suggests that they should be able to provide you with information on what, in their opinion, puts you inside IR35 and then make recommendations based on that.
Not ideal (looking at the prices they charge), however looking for a second opinion on your circumstance and contract may be a good idea.

I have all my contracts reviewed by B&C and have had great service.
Just to correct you, they will negotiate with the agency on their Contract Review package (what you would call their lowest?).

Strangely, you had to pay extra on the Gaurdian for them to negotiate but dont now.

b7C can only go on what the OP has told them. Im pretty sure they would only have said he \ she will always be inside IR35 if the working practices remain unchanged on every job.

[sociopath]

Where I don't think Zippy should be discussion his case on an open forum when it's on going with B&C I would be interested to know the outcome.

As far as I am aware the in the past being in an enduring role has it's risks but as long as you pass the main 3 tests of RoS, D&C and MoO and that the working practices meet a properly worded document you are as in the clear as you can be when it comes to IR35. I wasn't aware that certain positions automatically put you inside. If it did that's going to be a nightmare for anyone working in existing 1st, 2nd and possibly 3rd line teams for example. There was some discussion about whether social workers should be inside by default though I seem to remember.

Even though the role is enduring you could be filling in for maternity, covering busy periods and so on which surely are valid reasons for a contractor and doesn't automatically make them a disguised employee. There are enough people that have done 5+ years at clients who are (arguably) outside IR35 so a short term gig in a perm team shouldn't be an automatic inside flag.

I've a feeling the devil is in the details with this one as isn't as automatic as has been suggested so am intrigued.

I agree. Best for Op to discuss the issue with the professionals. Yes duration does not really indicate inside IR35. However the BAU arrangement could impact on the main 3 tests you have highlighted for example if the Op has no defined scope of works and used for various projects at the direction and control of the client. As you say best for the op to work with B&C to close out all their concerns. It sounded like if the Op could get a defined scope of works/projects B&C may have second thoughts as they have suggested. Likewise it would be interesting to see the outcome and hopefully the Op resolves the issue.

[sociopath]

I have all my contracts reviewed by B&C and have had great service.
Just to correct you, they will negotiate with the agency on their Contract Review package (what you would call their lowest?).

Strangely, you had to pay extra on the Gaurdian for them to negotiate but dont now.

b7C can only go on what the OP has told them. Im pretty sure they would only have said he \ she will always be inside IR35 if the working practices remain unchanged on every job.

Totally agree. They can only go on what they have been told by the Op. Likewise we can only comment on what we have been told.

[JB3000]

The latter I expected to work to my benefit in this case as I have a definite end date for this contract.
I have made it clear to the manager that I won't be subject to the same controls as he has over his permie staff regarding hours - he tried to make me do 8.5 hours on site, even though I'm contracted for 7.5 only. He said I have to take 1 hour lunch. I've said no way. I will work my 7.5 hours or 37.5 hours in a week as I deem fit. He's agreed, as long as it doesn't affect the work. I also have agreed that I can choose what site and sometimes work from home with the permies can't do unless they have medical leave...

��

I think Qdos would give you a pass based on the above and if you did turn out be be inside of IR35 they can also cover the tax, penalties and interest that your company would owe; great result!

IR35 Contract Review

IR35 Insurance

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

From everything that's been said by the OP, IMHO he would fall inside IR35 as he is working alongside and doing exactly the same job as the permanent staff under the same basic management controls - I am not sure that changing your lunch hour would count for very much in an IR35 investigation.

[MrMarkyMark]

however you doing the same type of work as what a permanent employee would do does not automatically mean you are caught by IR35 (I stress that this is my own opinion on IR35, as stated earlier, this is open to interpretation).

This.
Purely doing the same work, with the same skills, as a permy should not automatically put you inside, IMO.

You could say the same thing about many projects / roles out there.