What's the importance of this clause ? Please help

[platforminc]

will you be the only person in the company performing the role or will you be working as support to an existing department?

Support to an existing department and only person in the UK performing the role.

[platforminc]

Anyone.

[northernladuk]

Anyone.

I've lost what you are after now. You've had a number of the main pillars included now, being MoO and RoS. You just can't get the D&C statement in which isn't common anyway. There is a question whether the working conditions will reflect these however.

IMO you now know the situation and have to make a decision based on your attitude to risk. It's not water tight but it's not bad.

You could shore all this up with a Confirmation of Arrangements letter (which can be found on the QDOS site for free) which I believe does cover some comments about independent working (but could be wrong). Not all clients will sign CoE's though so possibly another unknown.

It is what it is now so it's up to you... Unless I'm missing something?

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

Support to an existing department and only person in the UK performing the role.

Then I would suggest, if the company cannot support this role themselves and have brought you in as a contractor, to work autonomously for a specific project you'd be fine without the SDC clause. However, if the role requires you to become integrated within the team and there would be some sort of reporting structure in place I'd suggest that the clause would be useful.

Without more information it's impossible to give you guarantees but I would suggest that a fail from Qdos (who I assume questioned your working practices) should pretty much tell you what you need to know

[platforminc]

Then I would suggest, if the company cannot support this role themselves and have brought you in as a contractor, to work autonomously for a specific project you'd be fine without the SDC clause. However, if the role requires you to become integrated within the team and there would be some sort of reporting structure in place I'd suggest that the clause would be useful.

Without more information it's impossible to give you guarantees but I would suggest that a fail from Qdos (who I assume questioned your working practices) should pretty much tell you what you need to know

The setup is that the company are primarily based in USA, however I will be offering technical expertise covering Europe. So there will be a reporting structure to the guys in the states.

I have sent qdos the amendment made to the contract and will await their review.

[NibblyPig]

It's like hiring a plumber to fix your boiler, you pay him to do the job, but you don't tell him how to do it.

TBF most clients don't understand contractors they think they're just expensive temporary permies.

If the client doesn't budge, weigh up the odds of defending yourself against an IR35 investigation without it.

While people say that the clause lets you do whatever you want and thus the client's reluctance is understandable, you can also say that lack of a clause means the client is gonna control your every move, and you'll be a permie.

So I would say, imagine HMRC comes along and says do your working practices put you under SDC. If the client is omitting the clause because they want to control your hours, work, etc. then abandon ship. Otherwise, it's probably fine. I expect you'll need to talk to the client about how they intend to use you.

Maybe just amp up the other parts, like specifying a named project with a defined goal, and check how the client wants to operate.