• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • FREE webinar: What does a post IR35 reform CV look like? : Mon, May 10, 2021 7:15 PM - 8:15 PM BST More details here.

IR35: Planning for April 2021 – should I stay or should I go?

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Originally posted by BlasterBates View Post

    This would assume that the contractor would be under the same working practices. However moving from a contract which allows subcontracting to one that doesn't is a substantial change in working practices.
    Only if the subcontracting clause was originally valid and not a fig leaf which wasn't supposed to be actually used
    merely at clientco for the entertainment

    Comment


      Originally posted by BlasterBates View Post

      This would assume that the contractor would be under the same working practices. However moving from a contract which allows subcontracting to one that doesn't is a substantial change in working practices.
      Who said it allowed subcontracting? Quantum77 did not say that. Quantum77 said they would be subcontracting work from their mate. My emphasis.

      Originally posted by quantum77
      contractor friend of mine is looking for work and asked if he could take the contract with them post April, and sub some of the work to me.
      Why are you struggling with this basic idea that clauses about subcontracting, assignment and substitution don't necessarily flow down?

      Regardless, it's the relationship with the end client that matters, not some contractual words or the number of intermediaries.

      Comment


        Originally posted by eek View Post

        Only if the subcontracting clause was originally valid and not a fig leaf which wasn't supposed to be actually used
        Thats true but the contractor in question is asking whether he should subcontract for his colleague, so in this case the clause would indeed be valid. In fact a clause isn't necessary because subcontracting would be an undeniable fact. He's simply worried if his colleague gets caught for IR35 HMRC would then go after the subcontractor, but my argument is the very fact that there is a subcontractor would be such a strong pointer outside IR35 an investigation would go no further.
        I'm alright Jack

        Comment


          Originally posted by jamesbrown View Post


          Why are you struggling with this basic idea that clauses about subcontracting, assignment and substitution don't necessarily flow down?

          Regardless, it's the relationship with the end client that matters, not some contractual words or the number of intermediaries.
          I didn't say that they did.

          I'm alright Jack

          Comment


            BlasterBates and jamesbrown - thanks for the detailed debate. There's lot of info in there for me to digest.

            I think at this point in time I'm going to finish with the client, and ask my contractor friend if he wishes to assist them alone.

            Comment

            Working...
            X