Consultancies providing services to pulbic sector and contractors....

[northernladuk]

So what's the upshot of AS then - avoid PS from April 17 onwards until they sort this out?

On a PS contract which ends in Feb 17 with talk of an extension but sounds like it may be one to swerve.

Erm. Did you read this thread? You can't have missed Eek mentioning his advice surely lol.

[gables]

So what's the upshot of AS then - avoid PS from April 17 onwards until they sort this out?

On a PS contract which ends in Feb 17 with talk of an extension but sounds like it may be one to swerve.

Surely it's only a swerve if that under IR35 what's paid to your ltd is untenable and that depends on your situation?

[eek]

Surely it's only a swerve if that under IR35 what's paid to your ltd is untenable and that depends on your situation?

It depends how risk adverse you are when it comes to HMRC. I really wouldn't want an existing contract to become inside IR35 come April as I suspect HMRC would starting look at the contract as a whole not just the bit from April 1st onwards - so my advice would be to not give them the opportunity to start that argument by moving elsewhere....

[gables]

It depends how risk adverse you are when it comes to HMRC. I really wouldn't want an existing contract to become inside IR35 come April as I suspect HMRC would starting look at the contract as a whole not just the bit from April 1st onwards - so my advice would be to not give them the opportunity to start that argument by moving elsewhere....

Yep, I agree with that, but for new contracts it should just form part of the picture when deciding to take on a piece of work.

[m0n1k3r]

Sadly I believe the right for Equal Experts to determine their status was removed between the initial consultation and the Autumn Statement - so I don't think its in their remit. And I doubt anyone at HMRC will determine any contractors there as outside in the early days (the risk news stories stating one rule for us and another for everyone else is just far too great).

I doubt that EE's clients even know who is a contractor and who is not. They all represent EE and work for EE, not for the client.

[m0n1k3r]

But if EE say you are outside and you're not then its their margin that gets hit (don't forget they charge each bod out as at least twice what they pay the contractor, they will up their rate by 50%, gov will pay it as no choice and they will carry on), only loser is the tax payer but we know no one in government cares about that (its all about Daily Mail headlines at the end of the day).

The margin is not 50% these days, except for ≤ 2 month gigs. It is more like 30-35% in most cases, down to 25% for larger PS projects, in exchange for larger volumes. But they take delivery responsibility, while a typical recruiter who doesn't take any responsibility whatsoever charge 20% (12% if under the CL1 framework).

[SlipTheJab]

The margin is not 50% these days, except for ≤ 2 month gigs. It is more like 30-35% in most cases, down to 25% for larger PS projects, in exchange for larger volumes. But they take delivery responsibility, while a typical recruiter who doesn't take any responsibility whatsoever charge 20% (12% if under the CL1 framework).

Indeed, I'm not knocking them, they seem very good at what they do and I think their way of working makes the contractors they engage outside even for a PS project, others on here disagree though

[northernladuk]

I still want to know what the pulbic sector is.......