PCG article about War on public sector contractors

[tarbera]

Don't worry

When they tax us to the hilt, then can expand this £125million project

BBC News - Nick Clegg scheme will pay firm to wake jobless teens

[wurzel]

When they tax us to the hilt, then can expand this £125million project

BBC News - Nick Clegg scheme will pay firm to wake jobless teens

Whatever next - bring back Wee Willy Winkie to make sure they're in bed on time?

[tractor]

...

This got me thinking about employer pensions in these circumstances.

If you work as an employee for bigco you can take advantage of an employer pensions scheme. Similarly, if you own a psc and are outside IR35, you can do the same.

If you are forced into IR35 as a condition of contract, you are unable to take advantage of the same provision whether or not you are actually IR35 caught. Discuss.

[wurzel]

This got me thinking about employer pensions in these circumstances.

If you work as an employee for bigco you can take advantage of an employer pensions scheme. Similarly, if you own a psc and are outside IR35, you can do the same.

If you are forced into IR35 as a condition of contract, you are unable to take advantage of the same provision whether or not you are actually IR35 caught. Discuss.

IR35 doesn't come into it. Having your Ltd paying into a company pension scheme is a legitimate expense IR35 caught or not.

[tractor]

IR35 doesn't come into it. Having your Ltd paying into a company pension scheme is a legitimate expense IR35 caught or not.

OK I originally searched for some info with a less than optimum search term aka tulip. Just did another one and found what I was looking for.

Move along, nothing to see here.......

[Rabotnik]

Seriously!? Nope, the recent changes to public sector contract applies to anyone with a rate of more than £230 a day and contracted for more than 6 months. So if you have 2 or more consecutive 3 monthers, you are within the remit.

How is it a problem? Again, are you serious? Under IR35, you're only allowed 5% as expenses and you'll pay far more tax and NI. Is that what you want to do?

In any event, it isnt just public sector that will be affected. I understand LTSB contracts now carry a clause that virtually demands you operate within IR35 and pay your fair share of tax.

I read it as their criteria being everyone with a contract >= 6 months is a target ("on contracts over six months"), but I guess it's more logical to count overall time. Regarding the IR35 thing, the article says "made to operate IR35", so I thought they meant they would be made to be IR35 compliant, i.e outside IR35, so I thought who cares we all try to be outside anyway. Today I realised they actually meant they would force people to be INSIDE IR35, which is highly undesirable, I agree.

I think I will do a 1 month extension which will end at the end of September and then I will abandon ship. The women are all minging in the NHS anyway

[BolshieBastard]

I read it as their criteria being everyone with a contract >= 6 months is a target ("on contracts over six months"), but I guess it's more logical to count overall time. Regarding the IR35 thing, the article says "made to operate IR35", so I thought they meant they would be made to be IR35 compliant, i.e outside IR35, so I thought who cares we all try to be outside anyway. Today I realised they actually meant they would force people to be INSIDE IR35, which is highly undesirable, I agree.

I think I will do a 1 month extension which will end at the end of September and then I will abandon ship. The women are all minging in the NHS anyway

Yes, as you now realise, IR35 compliant means caught by IR35. Bit surprised you thought it meant outside IR35 though!

[SueEllen]

Easy way round it.

Get all IT staff via one big consultancy or a consortium of consultancies/agencies.

If the consultancy/consortium then decides to use contractors or just happens to use the contractors the government department/government agency used before due to their unique knowledge then it's no-ones fault.

I've had similar in some large companies particularly in Europe.

Yes it does cost the organisation more for an extra layer of abstraction but if you want to ensure you get the specialist workers you need then needs must.

[IR35FanClub]

PCG article here

Do you think that you could see a move of contractors from public to private sector jobs? Maybe not, but either way I don't think it would be a good time to consider going into this area.

I'm looking at it the otherway... if they want me to carry on working for them, they're gonna have to pay me extra to cover the increase in my costs.

Seriously its about time they sorted this mess properly by getting the Office of Tax simplifiction to tell them - get your balls out, get rid of NI, bring in a flat rate tax of XX% on all income regardless of whether it's salary, dividends, interest or whatever. Then I can get on with running a 1 man business as a business without daily mail readers trying to say it's not a business. FFS. I get my car serviced by a mechanic who works for himself, my boiler serviced by a guy who works for himself, and my house painted by a guy who works for himself (I like to support independent tradesman). No one would argue they are not a business. But because I have "special" skills that only big companies need - data migration, and the projects last several months to a year or two, people [hmrc and daily mail readers] are trying to tell me I'm an employee. Lucky I don't live in Denver and have a batman suit - I know where the daily mail and hrmc are located!

[centurian]

And you can wave bye-bye to the insurance next year, I reckon.

And if that happens, it means you are also on the hook for any contracts you had over the past 5 years, not just from next year onwards.