Originally posted by TheCyclingProgrammer
View Post
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
HMRC - Onshore_employment_intermediaries_-_false_self_employment.pdf
Collapse
X
-
"You can't climb the ladder of success, with your hands in the pockets"
Arnold Schwarzenegger -
Originally posted by Turfer View Postpanicky gibberish
The current issue is that agencies have found a way of employing low paid people again on a self employed basis. That DOES need to be corrected which has to be done by changing the rights of substitution rules... See here for the original problem and then apply that rule to a desperate worker in a shop...
The question now is how do you keep flexibility for well paid freelance workers in a way that other agencies cannot abuse it to pay people little or nothing... I really cannot see how you do that without some people being hit in the crossfire.merely at clientco for the entertainmentComment
-
Can't you ???
Originally posted by eek View Post. I really cannot see how you do that without some people being hit in the crossfire.Comment
-
Anyone could see this coming. HMRC won't be happy until everyone is under PAYE.'Orwell's 1984 was supposed to be a warning, not an instruction manual'. -
Nick Pickles, director of Big Brother Watch.Comment
-
Originally posted by TheCyclingProgrammer View PostSo much scaremongering in the above post I don't even know where to begin...
The consultation is pretty clear that the typical PSC will not be affected by these changes as they are not within the scope of the agency legislation (which applies to a contract between an intermediary and an individual). It's also clear that IR35 will continue to be the most relevant legislation for PSCs.
I see you are making the rudimentary mistake of reading the consultation document as though it were the legislation. What matters is the draft legislation and it is far wider than the consultation document would have you believe. You will note that the consultation document does make it obvious that a PSC can be caught, but they are downplaying it.
Agencies aren't going to take the risk on this, unless there are substantial changes to that draft.
Remember statements were made in parliament that the income shifting rules weren't intended to deal with family companies, but HMRC took the Arctic Systems case all the way to the House of Lords.Comment
-
Originally posted by Turfer View PostYou need to note the fact that they are removing the requirement for the intermediary to have a contract with the individual.
I see you are making the rudimentary mistake of reading the consultation document as though it were the legislation. What matters is the draft legislation and it is far wider than the consultation document would have you believe. You will note that the consultation document does make it obvious that a PSC can be caught, but they are downplaying it.
Agencies aren't going to take the risk on this, unless there are substantial changes to that draft.
Remember statements were made in parliament that the income shifting rules weren't intended to deal with family companies, but HMRC took the Arctic Systems case all the way to the House of Lords.
However, not the point. The big difference between IR35 creation and this exercise is the number of involved and highly aware people contributing to he consultation. The risk to us in the proposal has been made clear to HMRC and they have responded that we are out of scope. If the draft legislation - which is also up for review when it's prepared - fails to make the distinction between us and the genuine(and entirely sensible) target, there will be hell to pay, starting with a Judicial review. HMRC are no longer immune to being challenged by people with big sticks before stuff hits the statute booksBlog? What blog...?Comment
-
This is KPMG's opinion: "The draft legislation is structured in such a way as to include workers involved in the provision of composite services, as intended by Government. However, KPMG is concerned that the wording of the legislation is too broadly drafted. Currently, the definition of an ‘agency contract’ does not permit services being provided through a personal service company (PSC) from being brought within the agency rules, as an agency contract requires a worker to be a party to the contract. These PSC arrangements are considered separately under Chapter 8 of Part 2 of ITEPA (application of provisions to workers under arrangements made by intermediaries) (the ‘IR35’ legislation). As drafted, we consider that in certain instances PSC arrangements may also be caught under the new rules, resulting in the agency having an obligation to operate PAYE on payments receivable by the worker ‘in consequence of’ providing the services. Such payments may not have been received directly from the end user; they may for example be dividends paid to the worker by the PSC. In addition, the new legislation also extends to cases where a worker is ‘personally involved in the provision of services’ and in consequence of this the client pays the worker for the services. This goes beyond the existing ‘personal service’ requirement.
When this is coupled with the “manner in which the worker provides the services [not being] subject to (or to the right of) supervision, direction or control by any person” it appears to introduce a more demanding test to avoid the impact of these rules than exists under the current agency rules"
Link to full document: http://www.kpmg.com/UK/en/IssuesAndI...ill-2013v2.pdfComment
-
Originally posted by LisaContractorUmbrella View PostCurrently, the definition of an ‘agency contract’ does not permit services being provided through a personal service company (PSC) from being brought within the agency rules, as an agency contract requires a worker to be a party to the contract.
You may say "But that's the same person". I'd say, yes, that may be the case, however the contract I'm signing is between the agency and Myco Ltd, which I am signing as a director, not between the Agency and the worker.Comment
-
Originally posted by Ticktock View PostMy contracts don't required the worker to be a party to the contract, they require a Director of the company to be a party to the contract.
You may say "But that's the same person". I'd say, yes, that may be the case, however the contract I'm signing is between the agency and Myco Ltd, which I am signing as a director, not between the Agency and the worker.Comment
-
This is the Egos viewpoint.
I don't think it directly hits the IR35 argument, I just think it will become nigh on impossible to get an agency contract that passes IR35.Comment
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Streamline Your Retirement with iSIPP: A Solution for Contractor Pensions Sep 1 09:13
- Making the most of pension lump sums: overview for contractors Sep 1 08:36
- Umbrella company tribunal cases are opening up; are your wages subject to unlawful deductions, too? Aug 31 08:38
- Contractors, relabelling 'labour' as 'services' to appear 'fully contracted out' won't dupe IR35 inspectors Aug 31 08:30
- How often does HMRC check tax returns? Aug 30 08:27
- Work-life balance as an IT contractor: 5 top tips from a tech recruiter Aug 30 08:20
- Autumn Statement 2023 tipped to prioritise mental health, in a boost for UK workplaces Aug 29 08:33
- Final reminder for contractors to respond to the umbrella consultation (closing today) Aug 29 08:09
- Top 5 most in demand cyber security contract roles Aug 25 08:38
- Changes to the right to request flexible working are incoming, but how will contractors be affected? Aug 24 08:25
Comment