P35 Question 6

[Chugnut]

Mine too. I'm not sure if they would accept my instruction to put No/No, but then I didn't ask.

I'm also assuming then that Yes/No on the P35 means I should be consistent on the Self Assessment and fill the "income dervided from service company" bit?

Edit: Interesting to see that the Yes/No stats are catching up with No/No since I first polled.

I guess that's what they're after. Could you explain the discrepancy in an inspection?

IANAA, etc.

[malvolio]

Since the questions have been re-worded I'd imagine this might be occur a fair bit. Try asking the PCG helpline or QDOS for their opinion, although judging by Lewis's post above it sounds like they think it's a load of fuss about nothing.

I find this very surprising myself. Obviously it's important enough to get two separate postings on the QDOS Freelancer News site though...

No, it's a load of fuss but it's certainly not over nothing! Several of us PCGers have been through assorted bits of guidance and HMRC-sourced material and have come to the conclusion that the defintions HMRC are using are changing over time; in other words the goalposts are being moved while we're trying to get an answer...

The hope is to get a consolidated update ready quickly, but since it's both a complex thing to summarise and the parameters have been changed in flight, that has been delayed slightly.

And FWIW PCG cannot offer advice to act illegally, for all sorts of obvious reasons. Given the question they are trying to answer is virtually incomprehensible, there is no way they can or will offer fixed advice, only informed guidance. Sadly, we'll all have to make our own decisions.

[QwertyBerty]

Unintentional gag?

OMG I'm a comic genius

[EvilWeevil]

While attempting to file my P35 via the Employers CD , I got to the legendary question 6.

In the help text, it says

A 'service' company is one where a worker works for a client company through an intermediary company and, but for that intermediary company, would be treated as an employee of the client company

So... I am answering no

The quotes around 'service' are theirs, not mine!

(YMMV)

[malvolio]

This is the whole problem - the paper version defines Service Company differently. It is a company where you provide your services personally and in which you have a shareholding, which is why Yes on that form is the better (and more honest) answer.

You'd think they were being deliberately obscure, almost....

[THEPUMA]

Out of interest, what with the agents and accountants who post here be putting on theirs?

No no.

If you have a "not unreasonably fettered" right of substitution.

[Ruprect]

While attempting to file my P35 via the Employers CD , I got to the legendary question 6.

In the help text, it says


So... I am answering no

The quotes around 'service' are theirs, not mine!

(YMMV)

Interesting. That seals it for me I think.

[moorfield]

No no.

If you have a "not unreasonably fettered" right of substitution.

Interesting point that. I have the same but the number bods are telling me yes/no - then again they haven't seen my contract review (qdos).

[ruth11]

Yes, this morning I read a definition of "personal service" that changes my viewpoint somewhat as well, referring to the possibility of substitution. If you have the right of substitution, then you are not providing a personal service. This would definitely change my answer to No, No. But as Mal says, it seems like there are various definitions out there which makes this a complicated decision.

[Ruprect]

Yes, this morning I read a definition of "personal service" that changes my viewpoint somewhat as well, referring to the possibility of substitution. If you have the right of substitution, then you are providing a personal service. This would definitely change my answer to No, No. But as Mal says, it seems like there are various definitions out there which makes this a complicated decision.

either

If you don't have the right of substitution, then you are providing a personal service

or

If you have the right of substitution, then you are not providing a personal service

surely?