Opt out of Conduct of employment agencies 2003 act?

[v8gaz]

This is my view and a risk that I don't wish to take. I asked the PCG what the legal position is but those of us who are members know their position on the matter and I didn't get an answer. The question was completely ignored.

.

Can you let me know how and when you asked and I'll make sure it's answered?

[tractor]

..

Can you let me know how and when you asked and I'll make sure it's answered?

I sent you a PM as I am guessing it's out of order to quote PCG forums.

[v8gaz]

I sent you a PM as I am guessing it's out of order to quote PCG forums.

Got your PM and replied. For the benefit of those reading that have been given the impression that PCG ignores questions from members, asking Al on the forum is not the same as "asking PCG"

[tractor]

...

Got your PM and replied. For the benefit of those reading that have been given the impression that PCG ignores questions from members, asking Al on the forum is not the same as "asking PCG"

And as you brought it into the open, this is the part of my reply that is relevant....

As to asking Al not being equal to asking the PCG, my question was to the forum and I am discussing the matter in the Official PCG Policy and Consultations forum. I am discussing policy matters and expect the PCG view and input. If I wanted to discuss the finer points of personal interpretations, I would post in General or better, The Lounge! What does it take to get an 'official' view???

[v8gaz]

To get an official view, read the published statements and documents on the website, or call the policy team at the office. The forum is for discussion and input - it's read by the team, and does influence policy. What it is not is official output. Anything in there is a discussion, and like all discussions, many views are expressed.

[psychocandy]

Agency worker regulations isn't the same thing as Conduct of Employment Agency regulations....

Oops. You;re right. Look stupid now.

[aytri]

I am confused on this... can anyone confirm whether the email extract below is agency bulltulip or not?

Regarding the Conduct of Employment Agencies 2003:

If the limited company contractor 'opts-in' to the employment regulations yet remains acting under his/her own limited company this could be deemed as being a disguised employee and avoiding paying the correct levels of NI and PAYE as a direct employee. This risk is also equally trasnferable to our end client. Who, if investigated also be the HMRC could be deemed as avoiding paying the correct NI and PAYE for the indvidual as an employer.
A further point to note as well for the contractor that if he 'opts-in' they should then cease to claim any Limited Company expenses for travel, sustenance, computer and mobile phone and regular working expenses via their Limited Company. Continuing to do so whilst opting out will be deemed as fraudulent by the HMRC against the Limited Company.

[our legal advisor] has also advised that we should make [the end client] completely aware with regards to this as essentially they are accepting a commercial risk by engaging [the contractor] without [the contractor] opting out. By opting in [the contractor] is removing any autonomy or independance from his limited company and fundamentally the client should want to revisit the rate and could drive this down based upon their added risk.

[v8gaz]

I call BS

[Kess]

Almost certainly BS. I wonder who [legal advisor] is...?

[aytri]

Almost certainly BS. I wonder who [legal advisor] is...?

I don't see what it has to do with the end client. My company contracts with the agent, the agent contracts with the end client.

So if I opt in (or rather, don't opt out!), surely it has nothing to do with the end client? And has no bearing on PAYE/tax/expenses or anything else?!!!