Contract + CEST

[DigitalUser]

I've been fortunate enough to secure a progressive client and (hopefully) engage with them on an outside-IR35 basis. The determination from the CEST tool states that off-payroll working rules do not apply (the work is not subject to control and the inputs are genuine and not contrived) - aside from this and a contract, is anyone aware of what else may be required to satisfy HMRC in the event of a future enquiry?

[jamesbrown]

I've been fortunate enough to secure a progressive client and (hopefully) engage with them on an outside-IR35 basis. The determination from the CEST tool states that off-payroll working rules do not apply (the work is not subject to control and the inputs are genuine and not contrived) - aside from this and a contract, is anyone aware of what else may be required to satisfy HMRC in the event of a future enquiry?

You don't really care in the sense that the supply chain above YourCo carries the liability. If you were asked to provide input to complete the CEST, then you should record any evidence that supports that input. Beyond that, the most you could do would be to record evidence of your WP as the contract continues but, again, the liability rests with the supply chain above YourCo from April 6.

( Whether HMRC actually accepts a completed CEST in future is anyone's guess, but not if it suits them, as they only accept it conditionally upon their view that the input was accurate. )

[DigitalUser]

You don't really care in the sense that the supply chain above YourCo carries the liability. If you were asked to provide input to complete the CEST, then you should record any evidence that supports that input. Beyond that, the most you could do would be to record evidence of your WP as the contract continues but, again, the liability rests with the supply chain above YourCo from April 6.

( Whether HMRC actually accepts a completed CEST in future is anyone's guess, but not if it suits them, as they only accept it conditionally upon their view that the input was accurate. )

That was my view as well. Whilst the risk is within the supply chain, I also want to make sure I'm not exposing them to unnecessary risk. The suggestion of documenting working practices is useful so I'll take that on board, thanks.

R.E. whether the input was accurate - reasonable to call this out. My approach to this would be to run a new determination post-April 6th (i.e. mid-contract) so that there is documented evidence that working practices are as suggested prior to the engagement starting.

[jamesbrown]

That was my view as well. Whilst the risk is within the supply chain, I also want to make sure I'm not exposing them to unnecessary risk. The suggestion of documenting working practices is useful so I'll take that on board, thanks.

R.E. whether the input was accurate - reasonable to call this out. My approach to this would be to run a new determination post-April 6th (i.e. mid-contract) so that there is documented evidence that working practices are as suggested prior to the engagement starting.

All seems perfectly reasonable to me. More than is strictly necessary, but no harm in that.

[Andy Hallett]

If the client decides it, the fee payer pays it and you have not lied about your working practices then you are technically safe as houses.

[northernladuk]

If the client decides it, the fee payer pays it and you have not lied about your working practices then you are technically safe as houses.

For now.....