IR35 review

[Zero Liability]

I've gone with B&C. We'll see what they come back with. The contract is structured so as to be outside IR35 and I don't think any of the working practices risk putting it inside IR35, but all the better to have it reviewed for peace of mind, as I'd rather try rectify any issues now rather than later.

[TheFaQQer]

I don't think any of the working practices risk putting it inside IR35

Really?

HMRC: The contract says that contractor could send a substitute, as long as you approve that?
Client: Well, yes. But we'd never allow that anyway.

HMRC: How did you view the contractor?
Client: (S)He was a great member of the team, just like the rest of the employees.

There goes the argument unless you have someone good to argue your case.

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

Really?

HMRC: The contract says that contractor could send a substitute, as long as you approve that?
Client: Well, yes. But we'd never allow that anyway.

HMRC: How did you view the contractor?
Client: (S)He was a great member of the team, just like the rest of the employees.

There goes the argument unless you have someone good to argue your case.

This is a really excellent point and one that should be handed out to newbies with a free bag of Smarties or something - it's all very well getting contract reviews and whatever but if the above scenario would actually be the reality of the situation then they're not really worth squat

[northernladuk]

What we should also hand to them is the way around this so they don't lose sleep over it. Although it isn't a golden bullet you can try get a Confirmation of Arrangements signed which is essentially getting the client to agree that the terms of the contract are actually what he agrees. As I say not an easy way out as he may still shaft you when he gets to court but still another chink in your armour.

[gingerjedi]

Will there ever be a 3rd way? I'm sick to death of IR35 and its woolly interpretations.

My contract puts me outside, working practices most probably inside, the fact the client tells me to stay at home every now and then when there's no work puts me back outside.

How can a contract review be definitive?

[northernladuk]

Will there ever be a 3rd way? I'm sick to death of IR35 and its woolly interpretations.

My contract puts me outside, working practices most probably inside, the fact the client tells me to stay at home every now and then when there's no work puts me back outside.

How can a contract review be definitive?

It can't because we hide behind loop holes and use legislation never intended for us to do what we do so will always be under scrutiny. Because it wasn't intended for most of us there is a huge area of interpretation which can only be handled by a court as part of an investigation so the best we can do is show as much diligence as possible to reduce the risk if the worst happens.

Lets be fair there are hundreds of thousand contractors who are clearly disguised employers using the scheme that really don't have a leg to stand on. Take TF's point about his colleagues. Because we are lumped in with this shower we cop for the attention they bring as well.

What I am really waiting for them to pick on a someone that has taken this seriously and done everything we talk about on here and see how quickly that one get's binned off. Then we will have some proof that all this hot air does actually account for something.

[Old Greg]

Will there ever be a 3rd way? I'm sick to death of IR35 and its woolly interpretations.

My contract puts me outside, working practices most probably inside, the fact the client tells me to stay at home every now and then when there's no work puts me back outside.

How can a contract review be definitive?

Lack of MOO. Outside IR35. £135 + VAT please and thank you.

[Zero Liability]

Really?

HMRC: The contract says that contractor could send a substitute, as long as you approve that?
Client: Well, yes. But we'd never allow that anyway.

HMRC: How did you view the contractor?
Client: (S)He was a great member of the team, just like the rest of the employees.

There goes the argument unless you have someone good to argue your case.

That is why I went with B&C, to ensure everything does fall out of it, and for improvements to be made where possible.

[QUOTE=northernladuk;1774443]What we should also hand to them is the way around this so they don't lose sleep over it. Although it isn't a golden bullet you can try get a Confirmation of Arrangements signed which is essentially getting the client to agree that the terms of the contract are actually what he agrees. As I say not an easy way out as he may still shaft you when he gets to court but still another chink in your armour.



Thanks. To clarify something about this - my client is the agency through which I procured the contract. They have little to no involvement in the business their client is supplying services for, and the contract is drafted so as to stipulate I am providing services in consultation with their client, for the benefit of that client's own end client. Would the relevant end client for the purposes of my contract be the agency in this instance, or would HMRC take a broader view?

[SueEllen]

That is why I went with B&C, to ensure everything does fall out of it, and for improvements to be made where possible.




Thanks. To clarify something about this - my client is the agency through which I procured the contract. They have little to no involvement in the business their client is supplying services for, and the contract is drafted so as to stipulate I am providing services in consultation with their client, for the benefit of that client's own end client. Would the relevant end client for the purposes of my contract be the agency in this instance, or would HMRC take a broader view?

The client would be anyone but the agency.

The agency is an intermediary. HMRC would be more interested in seeing whether your contract with the agency matched the contract the agency had with the client.

[northernladuk]

Thanks. To clarify something about this - my client is the agency through which I procured the contract. They have little to no involvement in the business their client is supplying services for, and the contract is drafted so as to stipulate I am providing services in consultation with their client, for the benefit of that client's own end client. Would the relevant end client for the purposes of my contract be the agency in this instance, or would HMRC take a broader view?

Incorrect. The agent has a contract with a client. He is paid by the client. He farms this work out to you via a contract and you get a cut of his pay from the client with him keeping a percentage for himself. You actually do work for the client. It is your working practices and how you are perceived in the working environment. Are you working as a contractor or are you a disguised permie of the client with a different pay system.

Sue raises an interest comment about the upper contract between agent and client which we very rarely get to see. I imagine it is mainly commercial and will not touch on working practices really. I can't see why your contract should match the agents one. It is a different relationship, but then we don't seem discuss the upper contract much. Anyhow, bottom line is are you working in a B2B capacity at the client or are you a permie under a different pay structure is the main thing.

Taking this in to account it would be your client that signs the CoA document obviously.