UTT gives HMRC another spanking.

[malvolio]

If think this will be an exception rather than the rule. Only way I can see companies invest time in preparing outside engagement is if they won't be able to find talent inside.
That depends how much reserves contractors have to wait it out.
I am not as optimistic as you and I hope I am wrong on this one.

They won't find "talent" inside, that is the point. Enough clients will be smart enough to realise the reality and offer outside-IR35 gigs to people with the right skills, rather than lose them to the competition. And over the last year or so, more and more proper contractors are realising that they have something to bargain with vis-á-vis IR35; that's already happening in the public secotr regardless of their Off Payroll rules.

You're partly right if your vision is a pile of workers with bulk skills and no rights at all to sit at a desk and do what they're told. If it's someone who can build complex business-focussed applications, deliver multi-million pound programmes or save £100s of thousands by feeding in skills you don't have, then you are wrong. The world is changing very rapidly.

[Lance]

When the changes get implemented, contractor will no longer be able to choose how he or she operates. It will be up to the client to decide how the engagement is going to look like and there is no incentive for clients to be on the hook for potentially getting the IR35 wrong. That means majority of work going forward will be deemed inside, as it is just easier and risk free.

There is an incentive.
It’s called getting the right person for the right money.
If my rate goes up by 30% if inside, or I simply refuse to be inside, then the client has a choice.

It’s all market forces.

There’s nothing more to this than cost. And the risk element is just a cost that might not need to be paid. Just imagine if the client decided rather than pay everyone 30%, they kept everyone outside, trousered the 30%, but accepted that the extra money will only be owed to HMRC if they win a case..... seems good business to keep everyone outside IMO.

[elsergiovolador]

They won't find "talent" inside, that is the point. Enough clients will be smart enough to realise the reality and offer outside-IR35 gigs to people with the right skills, rather than lose them to the competition. And over the last year or so, more and more proper contractors are realising that they have something to bargain with vis-á-vis IR35; that's already happening in the public secotr regardless of their Off Payroll rules.

You're partly right if your vision is a pile of workers with bulk skills and no rights at all to sit at a desk and do what they're told. If it's someone who can build complex business-focussed applications, deliver multi-million pound programmes or save £100s of thousands by feeding in skills you don't have, then you are wrong. The world is changing very rapidly.

Most public sector organisations no longer engage with contractors on outside basis and as April was approaching they terminated the arrangements or are in the process of doing so. This is because they know when the changes get implemented in private sector, they won't have to worry about contractors moving to get better outside contracts.

Instead of offering outside contract, company can up the rate to win talent, but that's a matter of cost vs benefit analysis. Would they spend slightly more without risk of crossing the taxman or save a little and then have sleepless nights.

[Lance]

Most public sector organisations no longer engage with contractors on outside basis and as April was approaching they terminated the arrangements or are in the process of doing so. This is because they know when the changes get implemented in private sector, they won't have to worry about contractors moving to get better outside contracts.

pure speculation verging on conspiracy theory.

[northernladuk]

pure speculation verging on conspiracy theory.

This is BAU for him.

[northernladyuk]

inneresting speculation verging on conspiracy theory.

FTFY

[Ardesco]

Most public sector organisations no longer engage with contractors on outside basis and as April was approaching they terminated the arrangements or are in the process of doing so. This is because they know when the changes get implemented in private sector, they won't have to worry about contractors moving to get better outside contracts.

Instead of offering outside contract, company can up the rate to win talent, but that's a matter of cost vs benefit analysis. Would they spend slightly more without risk of crossing the taxman or save a little and then have sleepless nights.

Sounds like a load of rubbish to me, I know a lot of government departments are still hiring outside IR35 where they need specific skills sets that are not easy to find.

[northernladuk]

Sounds like a load of rubbish to me, I know a lot of government departments are still hiring outside IR35 where they need specific skills sets that are not easy to find.

It is but its usual for him. I'm outside at one and there is a plenty of others. A fair mix of inside and outside to be fair but that's how it should be IMO. Not every gig is outside.

[DaveB]

Most public sector organisations no longer engage with contractors on outside basis and as April was approaching they terminated the arrangements or are in the process of doing so. This is because they know when the changes get implemented in private sector, they won't have to worry about contractors moving to get better outside contracts.

Instead of offering outside contract, company can up the rate to win talent, but that's a matter of cost vs benefit analysis. Would they spend slightly more without risk of crossing the taxman or save a little and then have sleepless nights.

Not true. You simply have to look at the gigs coming up on the Govt. Digital Marketplace under the Digital Outcomes and Specialists framework to see that at least 50% of them are listed as outside.

Edit : In fact I just check the listings from yesterday. 4 gigs from the Home Office, all specified as outside.

[elsergiovolador]

There is an incentive.
It’s called getting the right person for the right money.
If my rate goes up by 30% if inside, or I simply refuse to be inside, then the client has a choice.

It’s all market forces.

There’s nothing more to this than cost. And the risk element is just a cost that might not need to be paid. Just imagine if the client decided rather than pay everyone 30%, they kept everyone outside, trousered the 30%, but accepted that the extra money will only be owed to HMRC if they win a case..... seems good business to keep everyone outside IMO.

The CEST tool guidance says this:

Note that HMRC will not stand by results achieved through contrived arrangements that have been deliberately created
or designed to get a particular outcome. They would see this as deliberate non-compliance, and you risk financial
penalties.

That means HMRC could say they could take you on the inside contract, but created the outside arrangement to avoid tax.

There is no way around that I am afraid.