QDOS IR35 Cover?

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

I would agree with you if that scenario on its own proved that you were inside IR35, but as we all know it is the totality of the situation that matters (right to substitution etc). There are some situations where you would be outside IR35. Since they cannot prove that the contractor should have been certain that he was within IR35, they cannot establish an intent, beyond reasonable doubt, to evade tax by declaring themselves outside of it. Hence there can be no criminal tax evasion conviction.

People are only convicted when they do things that are provably wrong, such as failing to declare income at all etc.

Nope sorry don't agree - there are some circumstances when IR35 status is quite clear cut according to the terms of the original legislation and the case law that has subsequently arisen from it - to declare your self outside when you were quite clearly inside would be knowingly underpaying tax

[psychocandy]

I think what it does not cover is when you are already under investigation by them.

r

LOL. Thats a deffo.

Be like crashing your motor and saying can I have insurance please and BTW, can you shell out £10K for repairs pls.

[KentPhilip]

Nope sorry don't agree - there are some circumstances when IR35 status is quite clear cut according to the terms of the original legislation and the case law that has subsequently arisen from it - to declare your self outside when you were quite clearly inside would be knowingly underpaying tax

OK well I stand corrected - perhaps there are some cases when a contractor can be certain they are caught.

But what about if the contractor thinks they are probably caught, but are not certain they are caught. If they choose to declare themselves outside of IR35 and cover themselves using insurance, are they guilty of tax evasion? I don't think they can be, because they have not had sufficient intention to break the law. i.e. they would only be punished with fines and penalties etc.

If this is not the case, then taking things to their logical conclusion, a contractor who is only 99% certain they are outside the legislation could be jailed for tax evasion because they have some uncertainty.

[malvolio]

OK well I stand corrected - perhaps there are some cases when a contractor can be certain they are caught.

But what about if the contractor thinks they are probably caught, but are not certain they are caught. If they choose to declare themselves outside of IR35 and cover themselves using insurance, are they guilty of tax evasion? I don't think they can be, because they have not had sufficient intention to break the law. i.e. they would only be punished with fines and penalties etc.

If this is not the case, then taking things to their logical conclusion, a contractor who is only 99% certain they are outside the legislation could be jailed for tax evasion because they have some uncertainty.

Hey, nobody said IR35 was clear cut. The borderline cases are actually recognised as such, which is why nobody who's lost an appeal has been penalised, only the missing tax and interest has been reclaimed.

But the problem is knowing - or having a reasonable certainty - that you are caught by IR35 or having evidence from a review process of some kind to point you to being inside and still pretending to be outside. You will have to prove due diligence to avoid penalties and if HMRC decide you then ignored the results they may well turn nasty.

Plus, of course, nobody will give you tax protection cover unless they believe themselves that you are not caught. Which rather blows the whole idea.

[DaveB]

OK well I stand corrected - perhaps there are some cases when a contractor can be certain they are caught.

But what about if the contractor thinks they are probably caught, but are not certain they are caught. If they choose to declare themselves outside of IR35 and cover themselves using insurance, are they guilty of tax evasion? I don't think they can be, because they have not had sufficient intention to break the law. i.e. they would only be punished with fines and penalties etc.

If this is not the case, then taking things to their logical conclusion, a contractor who is only 99% certain they are outside the legislation could be jailed for tax evasion because they have some uncertainty.

Then get a contract review done and get a professional opinion. That shows due dilligance and that you have based your decision on facts rather than supposition.

You won't get insurance without having the review done anyway.

[KentPhilip]

You won't get insurance without having the review done anyway.

I have insurance through Qdos, and they never did any review.

I have to say in my case I am reasonably confident I am outside IR35, but the point I am discussing is that according to the terms of the QDOS insurance and my own experience signing up to it there is no requirement to show diligence or state an opinion or anything. So I could have legitimately got the insurance even if I'd been slam dunk caught.

I suppose the catch is the the insurance would pay out fines and penalties imposed by the court. But money on its own cannot compensate for time spent in prison.

There is a QDOS person who posts here sometimes. Perhaps their input would be beneficial?

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

I have insurance through Qdos, and they never did any review.

I have to say in my case I am reasonably confident I am outside IR35, but the point I am discussing is that according to the terms of the QDOS insurance and my own experience signing up to it there is no requirement to show diligence or state an opinion or anything. So I could have legitimately got the insurance even if I'd been slam dunk caught.

I suppose the catch is the the insurance would pay out fines and penalties imposed by the court. But money on its own cannot compensate for time spent in prison.

There is a QDOS person who posts here sometimes. Perhaps their input would be beneficial?

Just out of interest what makes you think you are outside?

[Qdos Contractor]

Hmm...where to start?

I think the most important thing to point out is that there is a 'statement of fact' that you complete when you buy the TLC35 (full IR35 insurance) policy. This just covers the key IR35 areas, asking whether (to the best of your knowledge) they are correct.

I explained it quite a bit in this thread here.

Let me know if there are any questions.

[KentPhilip]

Hmm...where to start?

I think the most important thing to point out is that there is a 'statement of fact' that you complete when you buy the TLC35 (full IR35 insurance) policy. This just covers the key IR35 areas, asking whether (to the best of your knowledge) they are correct.

I explained it quite a bit in this thread here.

Let me know if there are any questions.

And as if by magic, the shopkeeper appears.

I can't recall what the survey questions were. And I can't see them on the qdos website without re-registering. But I think they were just checking that you didn't start working for a company as a contractor that you had just left as permie. i.e. a basic check.

[SueEllen]

I have insurance through Qdos, and they never did any review.

I have to say in my case I am reasonably confident I am outside IR35, but the point I am discussing is that according to the terms of the QDOS insurance and my own experience signing up to it there is no requirement to show diligence or state an opinion or anything. So I could have legitimately got the insurance even if I'd been slam dunk caught.

I suppose the catch is the the insurance would pay out fines and penalties imposed by the court. But money on its own cannot compensate for time spent in prison.

Insurers are allowed to cancel policies and give you a refund for it if there is a chance you brought it by "accident" and they wouldn't have insured you knowing the full facts of your circumstances. Often these mistakes are only uncovered when a claim arises.