IR35 Forum Administration Review now out

[jamesbrown]

Nice jumble sale of words. What a disappointment, and it was a pretty low bar

To paraphrase, let's advertise IR35 better (x32). Good luck with that. Awareness and understanding are two totally different things, especially when IR35 was designed to complicate and obfuscate.

[eek]

Nice jumble sale of words. What a disappointment, and it was a pretty low bar

To paraphrase, let's advertise IR35 better (x32). Good luck with that. Awareness and understanding are two totally different things, especially when IR35 was designed to complicate and obfuscate.

They don't want people to understand merely to be scared....

[mudskipper]

But that's part of the problem - we all know what we mean by 'contractor' and we know that Ltd Co is a valid business mechanism for them - what HMG are beginning to see as contractors ranges from £1000 per day IT specialists to brickies to care workers to teachers to locums etc etc etc. It's like comparing apples to oranges - IMHO 'contractors' should be clearly defined and should be treated accordingly not lumped in with 'temps'

And what if that definition is achieved by encouraging them to incorporate as FLCs....?

[malvolio]

So why didn't they respond to scrapping IR35 as per the first paragraph?

Quite frankly the whole paper is about how HMRC have polished the turd that IR35 is over the last four years.

Why the PCG / IPSE are continuing with this review process is beyond me. My only conclusion is they have completely gone native and joined into the HRMC group think. After all they are on a payroll and like a bad contract at least the money keeps coming in.

This is clearly illustrated by the reasons for eliminating BETs. Contractors are reading the BET's and modifying their behavior accordingly to decrease their risk. This is utterly laughable as the expectation review panel seems to be that us taxpayers shouldn't modify our behavior and just get hammered with tax.

49 pages of total

<politicalrant> This perfectly illustrates the position of the Labour / Conservative and Liberal Democrat parties. Labour brought it in and the Conservative and Labour parties have polished it. Any talk about small business, innovation, entrepreneurship by these people deserves to be laughed at. </politicalrant>

Not IPSE, but also several other professional bodies like ICAEW, CIOT and REC plus assorted independents like Kate Cotteril. If you want to rant, at least understand the target.

[eek]

Not just IPSE, but also several other professional bodies like ICAEW, CIOT and REC plus assorted independents like Kate Cotteril. If you want to rant, at least understand the target.

as Malvolio says these consultations featured everyone with more than a passing interest in IR35 and they all probably knew what the end result was likely to be before it began. You need to participate to get your voice and viewpoint heard but that doesn't mean its going to be listened to.

However if people didn't take part you can safely say that the end result would be far far worse.

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

And what if that definition is achieved by encouraging them to incorporate as FLCs....?

I think that they could possibly come up with a definition that leaves FLCs as the only option but encouraging people to incorporate one way or another won't create a definition.

[Contreras]

This is clearly illustrated by the reasons for eliminating BETs. Contractors are reading the BET's and modifying their behavior accordingly to decrease their risk. This is utterly laughable as the expectation review panel seems to be that us taxpayers shouldn't modify our behavior and just get hammered with tax.

Laughable but also entirely foreseeable to anyone who didn't have their head stuck up the rear end of a hobby horse.