Might be looking for a sub, but how do you go about it? Do i sub contract via my company, or is it more hassle than its worth?? should i just put the names forward and walk away?
- 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!
Using a sub...
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by scooby View PostMight be looking for a sub, but how do you go about it? Do i sub contract via my company, or is it more hassle than its worth?? should i just put the names forward and walk away?
I would have thought from an IR35 perspective you should really provide the guy through your LTD to meet contractual requirements, like the big consultancies do. One guy leaves and another of their throng steps in to the breach. If you do it any other way I would expect HMRC to ask your client if your sub clause was nothing more than words. Also if you agree to just help them backfil and they take the liberty of finding their own contract it could also cast doubt on the sub clause.
IR35 aside for a moment I would put a name forward and walk away. It just isn't worth the hassle of running someone through your LTD, paying them, contracts and so on. Problem is would this satisfy IR35.
Maybe if it is worded properly your are still providing a sub, but wording it such that it is of benefit for the client to engage him and that they agree you have still fulfilled your obligation. Not sure how that would stand up though. If it is just a race between you and client to get a head then I wouldn't call that a substitution.'CUK forum personality of 2011 - Winner - Yes really!!!! -
Originally posted by northernladuk View PostInteresting question...
I would have thought from an IR35 perspective you should really provide the guy through your LTD to meet contractual requirements, like the big consultancies do. One guy leaves and another of their throng steps in to the breach. If you do it any other way I would expect HMRC to ask your client if your sub clause was nothing more than words. Also if you agree to just help them backfil and they take the liberty of finding their own contract it could also cast doubt on the sub clause.
IR35 aside for a moment I would put a name forward and walk away. It just isn't worth the hassle of running someone through your LTD, paying them, contracts and so on. Problem is would this satisfy IR35.
Maybe if it is worded properly your are still providing a sub, but wording it such that it is of benefit for the client to engage him and that they agree you have still fulfilled your obligation. Not sure how that would stand up though. If it is just a race between you and client to get a head then I wouldn't call that a substitution.I didn't say it was your ******* fault, I said I was blaming you!Comment
-
As per the previous response, I agree in that if you simply put forward some names this could cast doubt on the validity of your right of substitution.
Ideally from an IR35 perspective you should engage the substitute via your own limited company and should be responsible for paying the substitute. Actually providing a substitute would significantly improve the prospects of success in the event of an IR35 enquiry, and would make it much more difficult for HMRC to say that you are caught, so in my opinion it would certainly be worth it.Comment
-
Originally posted by Kate at Qdos View PostIdeally from an IR35 perspective you should engage the substitute via your own limited company and should be responsible for paying the substitute. Actually providing a substitute would significantly improve the prospects of success in the event of an IR35 enquiry, and would make it much more difficult for HMRC to say that you are caught, so in my opinion it would certainly be worth it.
However, be careful. If you propose a substitute and the client says no (and they are prepared to wait for you to do whatever it is that you planned on doing).
I'm am going through this right now (there's a bit more detail to it than that, but it covers the main point)Contracting: more of the money, less of the sh1tComment
-
I did it once years ago. HisCo Ltd did the work, and invoiced MyCo Ltd. MyCo Ltd invoiced ClientCo Ltd.
Simple as that.When freedom comes along, don't PISH in the water supply.....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