House of Lords review & IR35, PCG

[malvolio]

But they are saying you're a disguised employee of the end client. With none of the benefits, and the PSC must pay employer's NICs on top of this.

Practically speaking, it's easier to go after contractors' PSCs than potentially well-heeled end clients' legal departments. I think this, more than anything, is what drives the whole situation.

No, it's a refusal by HMRC to realise that workers are no longer employer or employee and to accept that a ltd Company is a perfectly valid and efficient way for us to operate. HMRC have been banging the "one man band is purely a tax avoidance vehicle" drum for years, it took a particularly stupid and ill-informed Paymaster General* to let them do something about it. Once done, so badly you need a court case to determine every individual challenge, it won't now be undone.


*Not strictly true. It takes a particular genius to become a failed tax evader...

[Zero Liability]

I agree entirely on that.

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

But they are saying you're a disguised employee of the end client. With none of the benefits, and the PSC must pay employer's NICs on top of this.

Practically speaking, it's easier to go after contractors' PSCs than potentially well-heeled end clients' legal departments. I think this, more than anything, is what drives the whole situation.

Yes I think that you are probably right

[Jog On]

From what I've seen the public sector would fall over quickly if they lost all their genuine PSC contractors. They tried to force us all inside IR35 in my last gig and when we all said "OK Cya and good luck" they made an immediate U-turn.

Having not been following this Lords thing too closely and apologies for not knowing this but 2 questions I have are:

1. Is this whole Lords thing actually going anywhere?
2. How much is it costing the tax payer?

[GB9]

From what I've seen the public sector would fall over quickly if they lost all their genuine PSC contractors. They tried to force us all inside IR35 in my last gig and when we all said "OK Cya and good luck" they made an immediate U-turn.

Having not been following this Lords thing too closely and apologies for not knowing this but 2 questions I have are:

1. Is this whole Lords thing actually going anywhere?
2. How much is it costing the tax payer?

Don't know how much it is costing but the Luds need to propose a solution to the whole mess by the end of March upon which Ministers can act.

I think the intention was to show PSCs as blood sucking vermin, defrauding the public purse of millions through our devious schemes. There would then be no difficulty in recommending we pay far more tax (in between public floggings).

Unfortunately for the powers that be, with the exception of a couple of self-help groups, no-one has much of a problem with us. Worse still, the process has proved something we all suspected: HMRC don't know their harris from their elbow.

[Jog On]

Don't know how much it is costing but the Luds need to propose a solution to the whole mess by the end of March upon which Ministers can act.

I think the intention was to show PSCs as blood sucking vermin, defrauding the public purse of millions through our devious schemes. There would then be no difficulty in recommending we pay far more tax (in between public floggings).

Unfortunately for the powers that be, with the exception of a couple of self-help groups, no-one has much of a problem with us. Worse still, the process has proved something we all suspected: HMRC don't know their harris from their elbow.

Right-o so BAU then for now...

Maybe they should ask Sir Philip Green what to do again?

[VectraMan]

Hang on a second, the issue that most people have, I think you'll find, is having to pay employer's NICS when IR35 caught.

How is this fair? I mean they've deemed you as a disguised employee and you get taxed as such but then, when they figure they can get even more money out of you, they have no problem treating you as a business to get the employer's NICS.

That's what's unfair. They want to have their cake AND eat it.

Somebody has to pay employer's NI. So contractors get quoted rates gross of Employer's NI, and have to pay it, or contractors get quoted a slightly lower rate net of Employer's NI and the client pays it. Makes no difference.

That was nothing to do with the point I was making though.

[habanero]

Pre-release / 158-page compilation

The 158 page compilation appears to have been taken off the website again. Could that be due to the accusations of criminal behaviour Mark had made against other named individuals in his contribution to the document? I had been surprised to see such material published in the first place.

does anyone have access to (or) a copy of the 158-page compilation please?

[GB9]

does anyone have access to (or) a copy of the 158-page compilation please?

Either do a search for house of lords personal service companies, or go directly to the parliament web site and search for the committee from there. Each committee has its own min site that includes publications.

[habanero]

Either do a search for house of lords personal service companies, or go directly to the parliament web site and search for the committee from there. Each committee has its own min site that includes publications.

Thanks GB9; I have the extended report but am after the one in which this chap MA's controversial evidence is said to have been contained.

I understood from the above (pages 3 & 4 in @malvolio's AND @EMEAfixer's posts) that there was a pre-release, which is no longer on the HLSC's site (the 158-pager) and not anywhere on the net and not even in archived/chached form!

Therefore, I thought it good to check with this thread and forum just in case anyone managed to download a copy of whatever early release there may have been.....Would be most grateful if anyone would be able to facilitate.