Client clause in SDS hold me liable for tax/ni or any penalty client faces from HMRC

[jamesbrown]

I've never had to sign an SDS for an inside contract, so I don't think it's standard practice.

Agree, it isn't standard practice or something I'd entertain, but it depends how much you want the gig. If you really need it, you can probably assume it's a worthless gesture, but it may also point to the client being a massive headache and generally clueless.

[WTFH]

Right, so if the clause said at your manager's discretion, you are to promptly drop your trousers and bend over, your mentality is such that to object is an "ego trip"!
The state of some people, since when did standing up for yourself and having some self-respect become an "ego trip!"

But the clause doesn’t say that. It’s not the clause that I am commenting on, but your reaction of “I want to cause some ripples” and “signed under protest”
My question is: what do you hope to achieve by doing this?

[gazelle]

But the clause doesn’t say that. It’s not the clause that I am commenting on, but your reaction of “I want to cause some ripples” and “signed under protest”
My question is: what do you hope to achieve by doing this?

Precisely that, I'm voicing my concerns in a way that doesn't cause me to get sacked but gently and calmly enough that at least any reasonable person would at least look at that clause and see if it can be removed and placed in a more appropriate place like between the client and agency and/or Umbrella.

If no one voices their concern, then how does the client know that there is an inappropriate clause causing grievance to their contractors.

"signed under protest" - have you not come across this? I've seen this on many consumer websites, where often companies have you over a barrel over something and you have little choice to sign up and agree to various terms and conditions - the advice is to sign it, but say you have "signed under protest".

Any way, my blood pressure has come down now from when the damn thing landed on Thursday and given the various peoples comments on here regarding as long as you've got your tax affairs in order there is nothing to worry about. Sometimes you just need an avenue to vent things through.

[gazelle]

Agree, it isn't standard practice or something I'd entertain, but it depends how much you want the gig. If you really need it, you can probably assume it's a worthless gesture, but it may also point to the client being a massive headache and generally clueless.

I think partly, I don't know if others have this feeling, being hard done by the fact by, I've been outside IR35 pretty much my whole contracting career (from late 1990's) and now having to accept Inside IR35 roles, now limited geographically as to where I can accept contracts, as can no longer put hotel and mileage through as expenses. Then clauses like this come along, it just another twist of the proverbial knife in the back.

[northernladuk]

Precisely that, I'm voicing my concerns in a way that doesn't cause me to get sacked but gently and calmly enough that at least any reasonable person would at least look at that clause and see if it can be removed and placed in a more appropriate place like between the client and agency and/or Umbrella.

If no one voices their concern, then how does the client know that there is an inappropriate clause causing grievance to their contractors.

"signed under protest" - have you not come across this? I've seen this on many consumer websites, where often companies have you over a barrel over something and you have little choice to sign up and agree to various terms and conditions - the advice is to sign it, but say you have "signed under protest".

Any way, my blood pressure has come down now from when the damn thing landed on Thursday and given the various peoples comments on here regarding as long as you've got your tax affairs in order there is nothing to worry about. Sometimes you just need an avenue to vent things through.

You can keep going on about it all you want. The fact of the matter is that 4 people have told you its a daft idea. Another stat is 100% of people that have replied have told you its a daft idea.

You know what. Just do it. You obviously don't want to listen so fill your boots.

[Snooky]

Some rather aggressive responses in this thread in a professional forum but, putting that aside, the points they make are genuine in my view.

Signing the contract "under protest" is meaningless in law and will make no difference to whether the terms apply.

You have three choices really:

1. Accept the contract as written
2. Try and negotiate changes
3. Walk away from the contract

To be clear, these are the only options you ever have as a contractor when dealing with a contract.

[Chris Bryce]

At the end of the day, you are responsible for your own tax affairs, so for your own peace of mind you should be checking every so often that the umbrella calcs are correct and that they are paying the money deducted to HMRC (by checking your own tax account)

Having said all that, the end-client/agency may be trying this clause out because they/their lawyers fear that forthcoming regulation might enable HMRC to look up the chain for unpaid taxes/NI (we may find out more about this tomorrow). It smacks of something a (very) junior lawyer would come up with to show how on-the-ball and clever they are.

In my view it's not acceptable for them to push this indemnity on to you - if any indemnity is required it should be asked of the umbrella not the employee.

[cojak]

If no one voices their concern, then how does the client know that there is an inappropriate clause causing grievance to their contractors.

That’s Snooky’s No.2 - Try and negotiate change.

That’s how you voice your concerns. Just say that you have concerns about that and that you’d like to change that part of the contract.

If they then say ‘No’, you’ve voiced your concerns. How you proceed after that is up to you.