Muppet IR35 question - are they making me disguised employee or am I being rude?

[Rabotnik]

All absolutely correct.

And any "contract review", "IR35 insurance", etc. will be equally worthless if the actual working practices don't conform precisely - which they rarely do. See the other recent thread we've had around this very area (and the other one million threads before it... )

The reality is that we as contractors rarely get to dictate and maintain terms so precisely across the entire duration of a contract - irrespective of what one or two posters around here would have you believe (or those organisations trying to sell you something in the myth that it will ultimately protect you from the Inland Revenue.) You simply have to be pragmatic and see how "close to the wind" you are sailing on a contract - both it's paperwork and it's actual working practices - and then make a call on how likely you think it is the IR will investigate and chase you through the courts. For a short six-month'er like this, I think there is little (but not zero) chance of ever being chased through the courts by the IR, so simply take the role and try to minimise your IR35 exposure as much as possible. That's all you can reasonably do.

Good advice, that's how I see it too. I don't think it's possible to do everything perfectly compliant since the rules are so strict, but in real life you can't just refuse to do a piece of work, and you can't tell a client you are only going to work 5 hour days, since they will just find someone else who will do as they are told.

Although I'm sure NLUK will come in here and proclaim that on all his contracts HE IS THE LAW

[malvolio]

IMHO it's good business to deliver what the client wants delivering; better that you get paid for it than someone else. However it's the way in which you deliver it that's important. If what they want is not in the scope of your contract, then negotaite a change to the bloody contract!

There's long been a rule that you shouldn't let the taxation tail wag the business dog. People seem to forget that rule when IR35 raises it's head, when the best IR35 defence is to behave like a business, not a temp.

[BlasterBates]

Lets be honest, you can dress it up all you want with "deliverables"...the truth is you're a disgused "temporary employee". As long as the contract passes the IR35 test and you have insurance don't worry about it. If HMRC did decide to put you under the microscope and take you to court you'd probably lose,even if you didn't go to the X-mas party, (quoting Kate Cotterel, the world's leading IR35 expert). The best defence against IR 35 is lots of contracts, it would just take the inspectors too much time to investigate each one, so they'd move on to more low hanging fruit.

[psychocandy]

Lets be honest, you can dress it up all you want with "deliverables"...the truth is you're a disgused "temporary employee". As long as the contract passes the IR35 test and you have insurance don't worry about it. If HMRC did decide to put you under the microscope and take you to court you'd probably lose,even if you didn't go to the X-mas party, (quoting Kate Cotterel, the world's leading IR35 expert). The best defence against IR 35 is lots of contracts, it would just take the inspectors too much time to investigate each one, so they'd move on to more low hanging fruit.

Agree with BB here. IMHO all clients want is easy to get rid off / paid for off different budget permies who'll do what they want and not cause a fuss.

Yeh, you can dress it up all you like with the contract but the client only gives a stuff if it effects them.

Get the contract reviewed at least, and try you're best in terms of practices but there's a limit to what you can do. If you kick off at every small thing, client will get someone else who causes less hassle.

Oh yeh, and join PCG/get IR35 insurance just in case.

[NotAllThere]

Agree with BB here. IMHO all clients want is easy to get rid off / paid for off different budget permies who'll do what they want and not cause a fuss...

Often, but not always.

Almost as often, there's a big project that needs some resource for a few months, with particular skills. That can only be fulfilled by contractors or a consultancy.

Also, there are clients who want someone in for a few weeks to work on a small project. Or they want regular services, but not full time.

I'm currently running three contracts on this basis, with a fourth starting in June. They're aware of the constraints on my time, have very little chance of finding anyone else who'll work as flexibly as I do, so I can usually juggle it to everyone's satisfaction. The only downside is that it can be very difficult to take holidays.

[northernladuk]

Often, but not always.

Almost as often, there's a big project that needs some resource for a few months, with particular skills. That can only be fulfilled by contractors or a consultancy.

Also, there are clients who want someone in for a few weeks to work on a small project. Or they want regular services, but not full time.

I'm currently running three contracts on this basis, with a fourth starting in June. They're aware of the constraints on my time, have very little chance of finding anyone else who'll work as flexibly as I do, so I can usually juggle it to everyone's satisfaction. The only downside is that it can be very difficult to take holidays.

Hidden Permie Alert

Sorry, couldn't resist.

[scooby]

Lets be honest, you can dress it up all you want with "deliverables"...the truth is you're a disgused "temporary employee". As long as the contract passes the IR35 test and you have insurance don't worry about it. If HMRC did decide to put you under the microscope and take you to court you'd probably lose,even if you didn't go to the X-mas party, (quoting Kate Cotterel, the world's leading IR35 expert). The best defence against IR 35 is lots of contracts, it would just take the inspectors too much time to investigate each one, so they'd move on to more low hanging fruit.

My contract review passed the IR35 tests, and i didnt have clear deliverables in there. Just the role they wanted me to fill.

[bobspud]

The best defence against IR 35 is lots of contracts, it would just take the inspectors too much time to investigate each one, so they'd move on to more low hanging fruit.

Don't bet on it. Once they turn you over on one contract I am willing to bet they would just take you for the lot and send you bankrupt trying to fight them....

[NotSaying]

Thanks for the feedback guys. I know this seems like a rehash of previous posts - but I have found the emphasis of the responses different - rather than what should be done or what numpties that know no better do - instead what pragmatic contractors who know how it should be done end up doing.

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

IMHO it's good business to deliver what the client wants delivering; better that you get paid for it than someone else. However it's the way in which you deliver it that's important. If what they want is not in the scope of your contract, then negotaite a change to the bloody contract!

There's long been a rule that you shouldn't let the taxation tail wag the business dog. People seem to forget that rule when IR35 raises it's head, when the best IR35 defence is to behave like a business, not a temp.

I agree Mal and anyone behaving like a businessman is likely to run far less risk of running foul of IR35 than someone who thinks like a temp - the problem comes when the role is that of a temporary worker. You can change contracts all you like and not go to the Xmas party etc but, at the end of the day, if there is a level of supervision, direction or control and you are only working that one single contract you would be likely to lose at an IR35 tribunal