Multiple Clients vs IR35

**Brett at Nixon Williams** · 5 August 2013, 12:21

Hi Andy,

You are indeed correct, IR35 would apply on a per-contract basis so it is the specifics of that particular contract that would need to be considered.

If in doubt about your IR35 status then I would recommend you have the contract(s) reviewed by a professional.

I hope this helps.

Brett

**northernladuk** · 5 August 2013, 12:21

But it will pass the Business Entity Tests with flying colours so will considerably reduce the possibility of being investigated (apparently).

It is also much more likely if you have multiple contracts they way you work on them will be pointer to outside. You will work on them when you can with minimal supervision delivering set pieces of work in a method you see fit. It is much more likely subs would be allowed and so on and so on.

3 or 4 parallel contracts are a lot different to being a bum on a seat next to a permie.

**LisaContractorUmbrella** · 5 August 2013, 12:22

Originally posted by blakeyuk View Post

Hi,
Just an off-the-wall question, nothing to do with my specific circumstances, but one I'll ask in my last week as an employee before joining the dark side next week.

I've seen a few people here post about having multiple simultaneous clients, and thinking that this protects them from IR35.

But given that IR35 is on a per-contract basis, isn't that just the same as having 2 (3, 4, x) part-time jobs, and therefore not an indicator in either direction?

Regards,
Andy

It depends - if you have multiple clients and you are free to work with them as and when you chose, with ROS and no MOO then you'll be outside IR35. If, however, you have several contracts running concurrently which tie you in to working hours and you are under the supervision, direction and control of the client, with MOO and no ROS then you'll be inside.

**blakeyuk** · 5 August 2013, 12:26

OK, thanks all. I began to think I was missing something.

Andy

**GillsMan** · 5 August 2013, 12:46

I have multiple clients on the go at any one time. The client that is most like a regular contracting gig is one of the large banks in Canary Wharf (beginning with B).

The contract wording is OK, but not the best. I was able to get a couple of clauses amended, but not all. So I was a little worried about the contract wording, as some weren't brilliant and were flagged in the Qdos review.

However, I decided to tell B******s that I had multiple clients, was a proper business and had an employee that they could use occasionally within the same daily rate payment. They loved this and I was able to use her during my holiday, so I billed almost my normal amount despite having a couple of weeks off.

The closest they have come to D&C is when they asked if I could come into the office 3 days a week. To be fair, I hadn't come in for over two weeks at that point, and it would seem sensible for me to come into their office on a semi-regular basis, so I was happy to agree.

So while the contract wording isn't brilliant, I think HMRC would have a tricky time painting me as a disguised employee, with multiple clients and a genuine and invoked RoS during my time with this client.

To the OP's point, having multiple contracts is not an IR35 defence by itself. But it can help your client understand that you're a genuine business, and it's then easier to ensure that you have working practices to suit.

**jamesbrown** · 5 August 2013, 12:50

Your understanding is strictly correct, i.e. the application is on a contract-specific basis. However, having multiple simultaneous clients is also circumstantial evidence that may be considered. Certainly, it doesn't hurt to have multiple clients w/r to status, assuming the individual contracts and working practices are aligned and point to being outside.

**BlasterBates** · 5 August 2013, 15:54

I would say it is a very strong pointer outside IR35. In the one case that I read the judge at a tribunal included it in the reasons why he judged in favour of a contractor.

The point is inspectors have limited resources in it is highly unlikely they´ll go after someone with multiple simultaneous clients when a) it´s not on their list of likely targets b) a lot more work sifting through lots of contracts. They´ll just move on to an easier target that fits their criteria.

So while there is a theoretical possibility of you being caught it is highly unlikely and I would sit back and relax.

**Old Greg** · 5 August 2013, 16:07

Originally posted by BlasterBates View Post

I would say it is a very strong pointer outside IR35. In the one case that I read the judge at a tribunal included it in the reasons why he judged in favour of a contractor.

The point is inspectors have limited resources in it is highly unlikely they´ll go after someone with multiple simultaneous clients when a) it´s not on their list of likely targets b) a lot more work sifting through lots of contracts. They´ll just move on to an easier target that fits their criteria.

So while there is a theoretical possibility of you being caught it is highly unlikely and I would sit back and relax.

Do we know of anyone with genuine multiple clients who has been ruled to be inside IR35?

I say genuine as I have know contractors who believe that invoicing their mate for £250 puts them outside IR35.

**jamesbrown** · 5 August 2013, 16:23

The fact remains that it applies on a contract-by-contract basis. However, I dare say that the few contractors working with multiple simultaneous clients (as opposed to billing your mate for a days work) are probably far removed from operating as permies anyway. In answer to the specific question above though, I think the contractor in the JLJ case (the split decision) was doing some work for other clients, although my recollection may be wrong. Anyway, that split case decision is evidence that it applies to each new contract/extension.

Multiple Clients vs IR35