Agency Working Regs Questionaire

[malvolio]

So you don't have anything in writing then?

Page 5 of this - http://www.pcg.org.uk/cms/documents/...LE%20PAGES.pdf - may help, as will the foreword by Professor Leighton, as will the body of the document if you read it fully.

And we don't know that it's not an AWR/IR35 one to one as there hasn't been a test case yet - all the indicators from the guidance would say that the tests will be exactly the same

But we all (should) know that IR35 is a taxation assessment jusdged by taxation tribunals under HMRC whereas teh AWR is an employement one judged by employement tribunals under the BIS. So same tests, different objectives and possibly differnt outcomes from the same tests.

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

Page 5 of this - http://www.pcg.org.uk/cms/documents/...LE%20PAGES.pdf - may help, as will the foreword by Professor Leighton, as will the body of the document if you read it fully.

But we all (should) know that IR35 is a taxation assessment jusdged by taxation tribunals under HMRC whereas teh AWR is an employement one judged by employement tribunals under the BIS. So same tests, different objectives and possibly differnt outcomes from the same tests.

So then, you don't have anything other than an opinion - certainly nothing in writing from BIS

[malvolio]

So then, you don't have anything other than an opinion - certainly nothing in writing from BIS

Let's get real. Do you think HMG are going to clarify in writing something they deliberately want left unclear...

These are not amateurs drafting these Acts. The vaguenesses in stuff like AWR, AWD and IR35 are entirely intentional. Making things black and white merely means the avoidance becomes much easier and the targets too restricted. However off the record conversations do happen, people do attend meetings under Chatham House rules, people are seconded to official committees where such things are discussed outside the actual meeting, people get to talk to ministers responsible for the intent of the law. And people can draw conclusions.

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

Let's get real. Do you think HMG are going to clarify in writing something they deliberately want left unclear...

These are not amateurs drafting these Acts. The vaguenesses in stuff like AWR, AWD and IR35 are entirely intentional. Making things black and white merely means the avoidance becomes much easier and the targets too restricted. However off the record conversations do happen, people do attend meetings under Chatham House rules, people are seconded to official committees where such things are discussed outside the actual meeting, people get to talk to ministers responsible for the intent of the law. And people can draw conclusions.

Then how on earth can you and the PCG possibly come out and make such a black and white statement - you've just defeated your own argument