I'm inside IR35 but my employee is outside - same contract

[jamesbrown]

That’s an interesting point.

Do you think it’s significant that there’s one employee and one director in the relationship with clientco?

In your opinion, would the situation be any different if both workers were working in the same way but instead of director/employee there were two directors or perhaps even a director/subcontractor? By working in the same way I mean two roles/one contract to work in the same team with same client.

Guess there would be no difference, as you can still argue an absence of personal service...

Right, it doesn't matter. Also, what matters is not an actual substitution but a right that is not unreasonably fettered. The main thing about a substitution is that the worker completes the work under the same T&Cs, on behalf of YourCo (or OPCo).

Best thing for the OP to do would be to get a status expert to discuss w/ ClientCo, so that everyone is clear about how to answer the substitution question in CEST and then to complete it accordingly (since a RoS is about the only thing CEST is good for). However, the OP may not get this opportunity if the client has decided to ignore reality (as many seem to be doing).

[pauljh]

Right, it doesn't matter. Also, what matters is not an actual substitution but a right that is not unreasonably fettered. The main thing about a substitution is that the worker completes the work under the same T&Cs, on behalf of YourCo (or OPCo).

Best thing for the OP to do would be to get a status expert to discuss w/ ClientCo, so that everyone is clear about how to answer the substitution question in CEST and then to complete it accordingly (since a RoS is about the only thing CEST is good for). However, the OP may not get this opportunity if the client has decided to ignore reality (as many seem to be doing).

Do we have some status expects who I can discuss with (paid) and get to talk to my client?
I thought I was good due to the issues with my "employess" tax (holiday, etc etc), my client is now suggesting they would not tax "his" payments but would tax mine even tho we are on same invoice and contract, I'm starting to think if they go that way I might lower my day rate to 1p and up his considerably, this all feels so just completly barmy....

So tips for someone to come in and "prove" one way or the other please?, QDOS I'm guessing (who I already have IR35 'insurance' with), waiting on new contract but I don't see how "half" of it can be inside IR35 and have outside?

[yorkshirespud]

Sounds like the OP’s company is a solid consultancy company, with its own employees, and an owner, who both consult for a client via the OP company.

How is this any different from Kainos or Deloitte etc turning up with 2 consultants, 1 of which is an employee of e.g Kainos, and the Director who is also a shareholder turns up at the client to consult as he’s still hardcore.

Not remotely inside IR35, and OP should inform client that off payroll does not apply, and any attempt is breach of contract.


Sent from my iPhone using Contractor UK Forum