Boom!

[pmeswani]

Just secured a 3 month contract with Sky. Rate isn't great, but is better than what I am on now. The role is a contract to perm (depending on whether they like me and whether I like them and whether I want to go perm).

Just hoping that the contract is IR35 friendly enough!

[northernladuk]

Just secured a 3 month contract with Sky. Rate isn't great, but is better than what I am on now. The role is a contract to perm (depending on whether they like me and whether I like them and whether I want to go perm).

Just hoping that the contract is IR35 friendly enough!

How can a contract to perm be IR35 friendly?????? If it was it would make a mockery of the whole thing!

[malvolio]

The role is a contract to perm ... Just hoping that the contract is IR35 friendly enough!

Seriously, what do you think the chances are...?

[pmeswani]

How can a contract to perm be IR35 friendly?????? If it was it would make a mockery of the whole thing!

If it were perm to contract with the same employer/client, I would agree with the you.... but from my understanding, going contract to perm shouldn't matter to IR35, unless someone can tell me differently.

I, unless I am mistaken, have not made any references to going to perm as being IR35 unfriendly.

[pmeswani]

Seriously, what do you think the chances are...?

My original post did have the IR35 friendly on the separate line... but to you too. .

I have to hope that the contract is IR35 friendly.

[malvolio]

IR35 is about disguised employment. If you are working a temporary role that is intended to become permanent, it will be a little tricky to prove that the temporary one does not have the characteristics of employment.

Agreed the contract may say all the right things, but the reality on the ground is what matters, and in this case can you really see a workable RoS, for instance?

[The Wikir Man]

If it were perm to contract with the same employer/client, I would agree with the you.... but from my understanding, going contract to perm shouldn't matter to IR35, unless someone can tell me differently.

I, unless I am mistaken, have not made any references to going to perm as being IR35 unfriendly.

IR35 is designed to catch disguised employees. If you have a contract that is going to revert to you doing the same job, under the same conditions, with the same direction of control, then I don't see how you can hope to escape it.

Even if the written contract is IR35 friendly, that will make absolutely no difference - it is the working conditions that matter, and if the client is treating you as a permie, and views you as a permie, then you are a permie.

[northernladuk]

The whole idea of IR35 is so you don't look like a hidden permanent replacement/employee. If you are doing a job that is going to move to a permanent position how on earth can you not look like one?

You can sit there happy in your own little world that the words on your contract make you look like your out but it is down to working practices NOT the words on the contract. If your working practice looks like a hidden permie, which in this case the must do due to your ascention to perm then you are NOT IR35 friendly. Deal with it. Don't try and manipulate your mindset to make YOU think you are ok. It isn't YOU that counts it is Hector and you can't pull the wool over their eyes as easily as you can yours.

You need to get real here if you are going to protect yourself from being caught.

I think you need to read and understand why IR35 exists and not just read the bits you need to not have in your contract IMO

[pmeswani]

IR35 is about disguised employment. If you are working a temporary role that is intended to become permanent, it will be a little tricky to prove that the temporary one does not have the characteristics of employment.

Agreed the contract may say all the right things, but the reality on the ground is what matters, and in this case can you really see a workable RoS, for instance?

There is no guarantee that the role will become permanent (despite how I worded it in my original post. I know I said it is a contract to perm, where I should have said it could be a contract to perm). There is no guarantee that I will take the perm role if offered, and I am not guaranteed to be doing the same line of work if I do go perm.

I know some of the IR35 conditions is based on working practices, and aware of some of the implications.

[northernladuk]

Don't you just love blind faith. Three people are advising you and still you are trying to convince someone. Thing is we don't need convincing of anything. We are giving our (similar) opinion of your situation. The fact all three of us said the same should be the warning flag you need to re-think.

It doesn't matter that you are going to take it or if it is definite but the indications are that if there is any chance of this role becoming permanent it must be tailored to suit. It will not be short term, it will be under the control of the client, it must be an existing role that appears on their reporting and organisational charts in an existing permie team. All the hallmarks of a perm job. Even if you contracted in this role without the hint of a permie job after it reeks of hidden employee which is NOT IR35 friendly. To be honest I do believe a large majority of contractors are filling this type of roll and kidding themselves they are IR35 friendly. I have done it myself by tailoring a contract to be IR35 friendly when the role could have easily been argued not to be as in this example.

Your situation in this transition doesn't matter. It is the role that matters. Could be, be might be, definately etc... it doesn't matter. The role itself tells us all we need to know IMO.