2nd contractor through LTD company

[northernladuk]

If the person you are putting in is a 'substitute' then you are IR35 proof.
Just make sure that it's worded like 'as the workload increases I cannot do all of it so I need to use the substitute clause in my contract to deliver'.

Having said that. Providing a sub-contractor is running a real business so you're risk is low anyway. IMO. IANAL.

But he's not. He's fulfilling a separate role.

[BlueSharp]

why should anyone go ballistic? They are paid what they agreed for? I have done this succesfully in the past. You will need to consider intermediary reporting implications. Your accountant should be able to do this for you. There's not really much more admin.

Just make sure you are confident about being paid on time.

I agree the rate is the rate, you are either happy with it or you are not. What someone elses slice of the pie is, is none of your business. It would be nieve of either to think the established relationship has no value.

[northernladuk]

I agree the rate is the rate, you are either happy with it or you are not. What someone elses slice of the pie is, is none of your business. It would be nieve of either to think the established relationship has no value.

All that and what the other guy said is great in theory but how many times do we get the posts about people finding out how much they are getting ripped off by. Might also be OK for him to rip of his mate as it's his first contact but when he get's his feet under the table and starts to understand the chain and how it works he's going to be less impressed. I've seen at least two new contractors come in under an existing contractor wanting to cream a bit of the rate for himself and neither went well.

We moan about what the agents do for their money but there is a list of stuff including factoring and the like, none of which the OP will have to do. 10% is about right for an agent so for the OP to take another 10% just for putting his name to the agent is a bit of a piss take. If the OP has to do a lot of the legwork and contracts and the like they yes, there is an argument, if he's just putting him on to the agent and not having to do much else then 10% is a lot. There is value in the arrangement but that value must be something approaching reasonable for time spent/risk etc... so yes. I don't think I'd ever find myself in this situation but if I did I wouldn't be happy with this., just like any contractor is when they find out they are being fleeced.

By all means go for it, but be prepared for the possibility of an unhappy contractor when he learns more about the how it all works. Might worth putting some extra thought in to handcuff clauses to stop him dropping you and going directly to the agent.

[M12]

Personally I would have gone for the finders fee approach. This keeps all parties happy and minimal effort on my part.