Agent asking for NI number before next payment

[northernladuk]

Have you ever had a contract changed to make it more IR35 friendly? Then you avoided IR35.

Wow, what an utter load of crap. I can't even begin to dig through that.

That I have to explain this tulip to to is an embarrassment when you go around claiming to be the oracle of all knowledge on contracting when really you are a twat with a little knowledge who likes to abuse newbies. It's no wonder I receive PMs from people wondering why you are such an cretin.

From Pyschocandy I'll bet lol... Don't worry, I get enough of my own posts asking me that...

Maybe not the best thread for you to be accusing people of not knowing anything really is it

[Unix]

Wow, what an utter load of crap. I can't even begin to dig through that.



From Pyschocandy I'll bet lol... Don't worry, I get enough of my own posts asking me that...

Maybe not the best thread for you to be accusing people of not knowing anything really is it

Apology accepted.

[Paddy]

It doesn't apply to contractors but it does apply to your agency who have to get the info off you anyway, so isn't that just semantics?

It does apply to agents and it will also apply to some contractors depending on the type of limited company. It will apply if you have a limited company with two or more directors, two or more shareholders and/or two or more "workers".

[FatLazyContractor]

Have you ever had a contract changed to make it more IR35 friendly? Then you avoided IR35. That I have to explain this tulip to to is an embarrassment when you go around claiming to be the oracle of all knowledge on contracting when really you are a twat with a little knowledge who likes to abuse newbies. It's no wonder I receive PMs from people wondering why you are such an cretin.

Please tell me you were joking.

[Unix]

Please tell me you were joking.

Rather than just posting stupid sentences explain how getting your contract reviewed and changed so you are less likely to be investigated/caught by the IR35 is not avoiding it?

[Contreras]

It doesn't apply to contractors but it does apply to your agency who have to get the info off you anyway, so isn't that just semantics?

Not semantics:

As is currently the case, the proposed Agency legislation will not generally apply where a worker is engaged via a PSC, as all the above criteria will not normally be met.

That's a professional opinion from a legal practice experienced in dealing with HMRC. I can't claim to understand all the arguments presented there but it is certainly not capitulation! Will be interesting to hear what IPSE come up with as well.

[FatLazyContractor]

Rather than just posting stupid sentences explain how getting your contract reviewed and changed so you are less likely to be investigated/caught by the IR35 is not avoiding it?

Ok, tell me something. After getting your IR35 review done, do you write HMRC inspectors a letter informing them about your due diligence exercise and advise them that you are outside IR35?

[TheFaQQer]

Oh right what about right of substitution?

Does your co have to supply the agency with the NI number of that employee of your company?

If they are an employee, then yes.

If they are a substitute, then yes.

If they are a provider of services (eg. "to provide ten days consultancy") rather than a substitute, then no.

[Unix]

Ok, tell me something. After getting your IR35 review done, do you write HMRC inspectors a letter informing them about your due diligence exercise and advise them that you are outside IR35?

No, does someone who uses a offshore scheme do that?

[FatLazyContractor]

No, does someone who uses a offshore scheme do that?

Put the offshore scheme users aside for a moment. You could use that to escape from a losing argument with someone else. Get back to the point.

So how are you expecting the HMRC to know the IR35 status of your contract?

Heck, do you know that IR in IR35 doesn't stand for Infra Red?



Why am I even ....