Similar role offered as Outside IR35

[bbp]

Thoughts please.

Been on an Inside role for almost an year now - with multiple extensions. I'm content with the project & client - until today. I came to know that other contractors who joined recently to perform the same work were given an Outside IR35 decision.

I was the first contractor in the team and did not have any justification to challenge the Inside decision when I took the role. After the work started, I realised this should have been an Outside role. I'm working without any control or supervision. Anyway, had signed the contract already. So ignored it. Now, I'm surprised these other roles were offered as Outside. Its same work as mine and in fact has some degree of supervision because of the contractors' lack of experience in the project.

I have 5 months to go before the end/extension. Is it a good idea to bring this up with the client at all (New role was apparently publicly advertised as Outside)? or should I just suck it up until the contract ends.

[cojak]

It’s too late now for this contract - going from inside to outside would just alert HMRC that you owe them money.

If you want an outside contract you’re going to need to work with a different client.

[eek]

It’s too late now for this contract - going from inside to outside would just alert HMRC that you owe them money.

If you want an outside contract you’re going to need to work with a different client.

+1 - you could appeal but it's not going to fix the tax and NI already paid.

Your best option is to leave and go elsewhere...

[Protagoras]

I have 5 months to go before the end/extension. Is it a good idea to bring this up with the client at all (New role was apparently publicly advertised as Outside)? or should I just suck it up until the contract ends.

There are possibly some other considerations
- would you be willing to agree the 'outside' contract ... if may contain clawback clauses that you wouldn't accept anyway?
- is there a difference between the rates, and is yours high enough to cover your expenses etc?
- if you're happy with the work and the client, there is a non-monetary value to that

If it's too much to bear, then time to move on. Otherwise, I'd say that the opportunity to reset arrangements would be at any contract renewal.

[eek]

There are possibly some other considerations
- would you be willing to agree the 'outside' contract ... if may contain clawback clauses that you wouldn't accept anyway?
- is there a difference between the rates, and is yours high enough to cover your expenses etc?
- if you're happy with the work and the client, there is a non-monetary value to that

If it's too much to bear, then time to move on. Otherwise, I'd say that the opportunity to reset arrangements would be at any contract renewal.

But that wouldn't help when HMRC come calling and ask why this contract suddenly switched to outside IR35....

It really is best for everyone if the OP finds another contract and leaves quickly rather than opening up a hornets nest.

[hobnob]

It’s too late now for this contract - going from inside to outside would just alert HMRC that you owe them money.

I'm surprised about that - I know that going from outside to inside is a big red flag, but if this contract "should have" been outside all along then surely the OP won't owe HMRC any money?

Looking at this another way, I assume that the OP is currently working through an umbrella company. I don't think it's a problem to then switch over to a limited company on the same contract.

OP, have you received an SDS from the client?

Having said all that, I agree that extension/renewal is the best time to negotiate something like this. If you've agreed to do another 5 months on an inside basis, I think you should honour that, but on the plus side it gives you plenty of time to broach the topic.

[Protagoras]

But that wouldn't help when HMRC come calling and ask why this contract suddenly switched to outside IR35....

Noting that the contract has been in place for under a year, the way I read the OP's post was that the client was responsible for the determination, so I was thinking that that's the client's problem (also assuming that if this switched to outside that there was no clawback clause).

The client may already be exposed to questions as to why roles that are very similar have different status.

What have I missed here?

[northernladuk]

It's quite possible his engagement is outside as they won't have them under D&C, they will allow a substitute and his working practices reflect an outside gig. His delivery is different to yours. That's the way it is. It's entirely possible they want to treat you differently to him so the contracts are different. That's the way it is I am afraid. Just because one supplier is outside it doesn't mean they all are.

It could be historic and they've changed their engagement but even if that is the case, as everyone has said, it's going to be very risky to swap from one to the other. You are going to have to be prepared to convince HMRC in an investigation and bearing in mind it's the client that is on the hook it's unlikely they are going to want to expose themselves just for your sake. Odd situation to be sure but not unthinkable.

[cojak]

I'm surprised about that - I know that going from outside to inside is a big red flag, but if this contract "should have" been outside all along then surely the OP won't owe HMRC any money?

Looking at this another way, I assume that the OP is currently working through an umbrella company. I don't think it's a problem to then switch over to a limited company on the same contract.

OP, have you received an SDS from the client?

Having said all that, I agree that extension/renewal is the best time to negotiate something like this. If you've agreed to do another 5 months on an inside basis, I think you should honour that, but on the plus side it gives you plenty of time to broach the topic.

I think that the true status of this contract is now irrelevant. HMRC have had their money and I very much doubt that they’ll let the rest of it go without a fight.

[dsc]

Thoughts please.

Been on an Inside role for almost an year now - with multiple extensions. I'm content with the project & client - until today. I came to know that other contractors who joined recently to perform the same work were given an Outside IR35 decision.

I was the first contractor in the team and did not have any justification to challenge the Inside decision when I took the role. After the work started, I realised this should have been an Outside role. I'm working without any control or supervision. Anyway, had signed the contract already. So ignored it. Now, I'm surprised these other roles were offered as Outside. Its same work as mine and in fact has some degree of supervision because of the contractors' lack of experience in the project.

I have 5 months to go before the end/extension. Is it a good idea to bring this up with the client at all (New role was apparently publicly advertised as Outside)? or should I just suck it up until the contract ends.

Are you sure it's a permanent outside rather the the often tried "offer it as outside to lure people in and then tell them half way through it's actually inside"? even if that's not the case, are they genuinely outside or again been told it's outside to get some bums on seats when the roles are actually more inside than not (and the company is taking the risk)?

It's possible that in your case they've been overly cautious whereas now they need people desperately and are willing to risk it saying these roles are outside.