Thoughts to Ponder whilst commuting...

[quackhandle]

To celebrate my 1000th post stick in yer thoughts and ponderables (business wise) you had during the dull commute.

I did wonder this morning about would having an exclusivity agreement in your contract by the client put you inside IR35? So for duration of contract you can't go and gig for another client. Could you charge more because of this?


qh

[northernladuk]

Bearing mind I have never seen this or head anyone mention it is this a realistic situation? Even if it were does it mean you fail any of the three major points of D&C, MoOd and RoS?

[quackhandle]

Bearing mind I have never seen this or head anyone mention it is this a realistic situation? Even if it were does it mean you fail any of the three major points of D&C, MoOd and RoS?

I concur but what if your clients were directly competing against each other?

qh

[anthony]

Even if it were does it mean you fail any of the three major points of D&C, MoOd and RoS?

Excuse the ignorance and slight side not; but could you explain what these abbreviations mean?

[TheFaQQer]

Excuse the ignorance and slight side not; but could you explain what these abbreviations mean?

Direction and Control
Mutuality of Obligation
Right of Substitution

Have a look in the IR35 starter guides over on the right for more details.

[cojak]

Excuse the ignorance and slight side not; but could you explain what these abbreviations mean?

On the right you'll find CUK Navigation. >>>>>>>>>

Look down and you'll come to the First Timers section. Have a read through there.

[tractor]

...

Bearing mind I have never seen this or head anyone mention it is this a realistic situation? Even if it were does it mean you fail any of the three major points of D&C, MoOd and RoS?

ISTR that before the 3 pillars of MoO, D & C and RoS were established, exclusivity was perceived to be a potential pointer inside. Hence, around that time people were negotiating non-exclusivity clauses.

I'm not sure how much of a pointer it may be perceived to be nowadays, if at all.

[Bunk]

Bearing mind I have never seen this or head anyone mention it is this a realistic situation? Even if it were does it mean you fail any of the three major points of D&C, MoOd and RoS?

You're following the IPSE guide to acronyms there aren't you?

[TheFaQQer]

ISTR that before the 3 pillars of MoO, D & C and RoS were established, exclusivity was perceived to be a potential pointer inside. Hence, around that time people were negotiating non-exclusivity clauses.

I'm not sure how much of a pointer it may be perceived to be nowadays, if at all.

There is a difference between having an exclusivity clause (ie. we [edit: the contractor company] will only work with you [edit: the client]) and having a non-compete clause (ie. we [contractor] can work with anyone, but not with your competitors [the competitors of the client] for a given period).

My gut feeling would be that if you have exclusivity, then it's asking for trouble - the client wants you and only you, so the chances of an RoS defence look anorexic. Likewise with a MoO defence - they probably expect to keep you, and will pay you even if there is no work to do. Which only gives D&C to fight the case on.

A non-compete clause would need to be examined closely as well - would HMRC argue that it's essentially the same thing as an exclusivity clause because you haven't got anyone else that could do the work? Probably - but that doesn't mean that it's an argument that they would win. It's probably a much easier one to argue, though - it's a common industry requirement (in certain sectors at least) that you have this kind of restriction.

[tractor]

...

There is a difference between having an exclusivity clause (ie. we will only work with you) and having a non-compete clause (ie. we can work with anyone, but not with your competitors for a given period).

My gut feeling would be that if you have exclusivity, then it's asking for trouble - the client wants you and only you, so the chances of an RoS defence look anorexic. Likewise with a MoO defence - they probably expect to keep you, and will pay you even if there is no work to do. Which only gives D&C to fight the case on.

A non-compete clause would need to be examined closely as well - would HMRC argue that it's essentially the same thing as an exclusivity clause because you haven't got anyone else that could do the work? Probably - but that doesn't mean that it's an argument that they would win. It's probably a much easier one to argue, though - it's a common industry requirement (in certain sectors at least) that you have this kind of restriction.

What the OP described was YOU can only work with US, which is completely different

" So for duration of contract you can't go and gig for another client."