(yet another thread about) Back to perm offer

[northernladuk]

Or whose cases are quietly dropped.

There are posters on here who were put through loads of stress but because of their insurance HMRC quietly dropped their cases.

Ah absolutey yes. Didn't one of our regular'ish posters mention on here it took 3 years to drop.. Yuk.

[SueEllen]

Ah absolutey yes. Didn't one of our regular'ish posters mention on here it took 3 years to drop.. Yuk.

I think the time to drop them varies from just over a year to what you mentioned, as I remember about 3 regular'ish posters mentioning it.

Generally if all the clients' you have contracted with are on the ball and simply say look at the contract, they have difficulty digging.

[BoggyMcCBoggyFace]

Just out of interest, I read recently your chances of being investigated by HMRC are about 60k to 1. They win practically none. So it's likely just a straight info request. I know people who have gone contract to perm at the same bank and heard nothing. I doubt very much the bank will even respond unless it's a legal request and done under a formal investigation. I've also been contracting for 9 years now and IR35 has been around all that time, nothing much has changed at all., it's still as practically impossible to prosecute as it always was. And the IR35 warriors are just seem to be adding to the hysteria. Every other post has some warning about IR35 but how many people have ever been successfully prosecuted ?

Yeah I know others who went contract to perm in same role and never heard a thing, the people I know of are at one client and they operated via an agency not direct before going perm, they also only went perm about 5 months ago, HMRC started asking questions with 3 months of going perm. I really don't know how HMRC identified them, the people it impacts think it was may be some agency reporting I don't know, could be a p*ssed off a permy grassing them up. I can see it being an easy target though for HMRC go to employers and ask who went contract to perm, gives them a targeted list.

HMRC wrecked contracting it sucks.

[radish2008]

Yeah I know others who went contract to perm in same role and never heard a thing, the people I know of are at one client and they operated via an agency not direct before going perm, they also only went perm about 5 months ago, HMRC started asking questions with 3 months of going perm. I really don't know how HMRC identified them, the people it impacts think it was may be some agency reporting I don't know, could be a p*ssed off a permy grassing them up. I can see it being an easy target though for HMRC go to employers and ask who went contract to perm, gives them a targeted list.

HMRC wrecked contracting it sucks.

I think most companies would tell them to FO.

[SueEllen]

I think most companies would tell them to FO.

Depends who deals with them.

If it's HR then they say too much.

[radish2008]

Depends who deals with them.

If it's HR then they say too much.

I would hope the fear of litigation might quieten them a little.

[psychocandy]

£110K perm. I'd be taking it.

[MrMarkyMark]

FTFY

£110K perm. I'd never be offerred it.

[northernladuk]

£110K perm. I'd be moaning about it.

FTFY

[BoggyMcCBoggyFace]

I think most companies would tell them to FO.

Turns out they didn't need HR to tell them, they believe now HMRC used the NI number they gave the agent the NI number as identifier when they contracted, not sure how HMRC were aware of the NI number though may be some agency reporting, NI number was then identified as PAYE when they were perm, general view is HMRC didn't have all the pieces of info to be sure but enough to make them ask the person the questions. The HMRC systems behind the scenes seem to be pretty smart at picking up things thay may suggest X or Y.