Long contract duration does increase risk of IR35 investigation. One only needs to study the cases where these investigations are started. Dragonfly Consulting Ltd spent years at the AA and got taken for 99k. There are many other similar examples. The longer the contract the fatter the target and therefore the more precautions you will need.
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
11 Month Contract or IR35
Collapse
X
-
-
I suspect your mate has been working for one of those companies that have a policy of ditching all contractors after a certain amount of time.
I worked for one that has such a policy - you can only work for them as a contractor for 51 weeks. Then you have to leave for a minimum of 3 months before returning.
There must be a belief out there that they are reducing any risk by doing this - they are definitely not gaining by it, because every 51 weeks they have to do a recruitment drive and retrain new staff. Must cost them loads each time. I know the team I was working for were not happy about it (the permies I mean) because they lose all the experienced guys and have to start all over again. Plus the workforce is downsized for a few weeks whilst they sort it out.Comment
-
Originally posted by ruth11 View PostI suspect your mate has been working for one of those companies that have a policy of ditching all contractors after a certain amount of time.
I worked for one that has such a policy - you can only work for them as a contractor for 51 weeks. Then you have to leave for a minimum of 3 months before returning.
There must be a belief out there that they are reducing any risk by doing this - they are definitely not gaining by it, because every 51 weeks they have to do a recruitment drive and retrain new staff. Must cost them loads each time. I know the team I was working for were not happy about it (the permies I mean) because they lose all the experienced guys and have to start all over again. Plus the workforce is downsized for a few weeks whilst they sort it out.Comment
-
Originally posted by Turion View PostLong contract duration does increase risk of IR35 investigation. One only needs to study the cases where these investigations are started. Dragonfly Consulting Ltd spent years at the AA and got taken for 99k. There are many other similar examples. The longer the contract the fatter the target and therefore the more precautions you will need.
Dragonfly didn't lose because he'd been there for a time, he lost because the commissioner was misled about the realities of D&C and RoS by the client's HR wonk who apparently chose to disregard the contract, and because the lower Agency/HisCo contract was not supported by the upper Agency/Client one (which is the real crime...)Blog? What blog...?Comment
-
Actually, this is a good question (If I do say so myself), and reflects my situation actually.
6 Months with Client A
6 Months with Client B
6 Months with Client C
12 Months with Client A
Now, if investigated, Each of those 4 periods is under a separate contract. Would HMRC investigate all 4 concurrently, or choose say Client A, which itself has 2 separate contracts. Do they choose just one contract or all of them. In which case dragging 4 contracts throught the legal system would be quite laborious I'd suspect! More so, I'd have thought, than if you'd just had 1 contract with Client A for 30 Months. I'd have thought that was much easier to 'cherry pick' - irrespective of whether duration is a factor or not.
Out of interest, what cases do we know of where multiple short duration contracts have been investigated? All the big one's that I seem to hear about are over 2 Years in duration, and in particular the one's that lost are well known and often referenced to on here... Or is this just because a 4 year contract losing you £99,000 is News worthy? But someone who was caught on a 6 month gig costing only £5,000 is just not worth reporting on!Last edited by rawly; 25 April 2008, 08:46.Comment
-
Originally posted by malvolio View PostBut simple duration is of no relevance, despite appearances. Afer all, is it not the sign of a good business that they retain the same profitable customer for an extended period?
Dragonfly didn't lose because he'd been there for a time, he lost because the commissioner was misled about the realities of D&C and RoS by the client's HR wonk who apparently chose to disregard the contract, and because the lower Agency/HisCo contract was not supported by the upper Agency/Client one (which is the real crime...)Comment
-
Originally posted by Turion View PostThe overal analysis may be correct, but if this was a single 3 or 6 month contract I do not think they (HMRC) would have bothered. Also would the result have been different if Dragon Fly had had 8 contracts of average 6 months over the 4 yr period with different clients. Would HMRC have started to investigate in the first place. I say again that that is unlikely.Blog? What blog...?Comment
-
Originally posted by Turion View PostLong contract duration does increase risk of IR35 investigation. One only needs to study the cases where these investigations are started. Dragonfly Consulting Ltd spent years at the AA and got taken for 99k. There are many other similar examples. The longer the contract the fatter the target and therefore the more precautions you will need.
Remind me again, how did the AA do out of this?
NN"Israel, Palestine, Cats." He Said
"See?"Comment
-
Originally posted by NickNick View Postthis just shows up where a client doesn't know how to employ comtractors.
I pointed all this out to them, and just got a stunned silence in return.... muppets....Comment
-
Legally it is not relevant maybe, I have no idea, but being practical the IR stands to gain more from challenging a long contract than a short one for the same effort. To that extent a long contract may be more of a risk.bloggoth
If everything isn't black and white, I say, 'Why the hell not?'
John Wayne (My guru, not to be confused with my beloved prophet Jeremy Clarkson)Comment
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Streamline Your Retirement with iSIPP: A Solution for Contractor Pensions Sep 1 09:13
- Making the most of pension lump sums: overview for contractors Sep 1 08:36
- Umbrella company tribunal cases are opening up; are your wages subject to unlawful deductions, too? Aug 31 08:38
- Contractors, relabelling 'labour' as 'services' to appear 'fully contracted out' won't dupe IR35 inspectors Aug 31 08:30
- How often does HMRC check tax returns? Aug 30 08:27
- Work-life balance as an IT contractor: 5 top tips from a tech recruiter Aug 30 08:20
- Autumn Statement 2023 tipped to prioritise mental health, in a boost for UK workplaces Aug 29 08:33
- Final reminder for contractors to respond to the umbrella consultation (closing today) Aug 29 08:09
- Top 5 most in demand cyber security contract roles Aug 25 08:38
- Changes to the right to request flexible working are incoming, but how will contractors be affected? Aug 24 08:25
Comment