Why we MUST ditch our lazy attitude to finding work through agents and agencies

[Sysman]

That doesn't sound very likely. Me and Eek are both in the NE

I'm pretty confident that the NE has more work than the pair of you can cope with alone

[The Spartan]

I had my first year as a contractor with an umbrella and could claim expenses.

I think there needs a better split on what can and cannot be claimed, rather than a blanket ban. Claiming travel and accommodation while working away should be it. If you want to pay £30 for a meal rather than £8 that is your wont. I'd be having lunch whether I worked perm or contract, etc. - any costs reasonably paid by a perm who isn't stupid enough to live a 2 hour commute from their job shouldn't be claimable.

I hear what you're saying but when you're staying away in a hotel it's not as if you have facilities to cook and prepare food, I've never been very lavish when purchasing food while away and have always tried to keep it to a minimum as ultimately it's coming out of the company's pot of money.

[NibblyPig]

Meanwhile Peer claims £300 a day in expenses to walk 200 yards to work at House of Lords - Telegraph

[ShandyDrinker]

It won't cause rates to go up, multinationals will scream about a skills shortage, and more ICTs will be allowed

We're already seeing this. Look at some of the recent articles on this website and contractorcalculator. I'm sure someone will post evidence to the contrary but it's interesting how skills shortages are rarely reported for "closed shops" such as lawyers, accountants and so on where the hourly rates can be eye watering.

[d000hg]

I'm pretty confident that the NE has more work than the pair of you can cope with alone

Yeah but I very rarely get emails about local work - it's mostly in Cambridge which is about the hardest place in England to commute to from the NE (I think?)

[unixman]

I'm guessing you don't care about expenses?

On the contrary I am staying away mon-fri and currently being penalized by the 2 year rule, depriving me of many expenses.

[Martin Scroatman]

Yeah but I very rarely get emails about local work - it's mostly in Cambridge which is about the hardest place in England to commute to from the NE (I think?)

Hmmm... At least it's on the same side of the country.

You should try getting there from Yeovil. It's one part of the country I completely discount because it's so hard to get to.

I once had a chance of a lucradive number in Ipswich but the 5 hours it would take by public transport or driving had me thinking no way José.

I belive there was a time when you could fly into Norwich from Plymouth and/ or Bristol/Exeter but there seem to be no operators flying those routes any more.

How I miss Brymon Airways :sad:

[Sysman]

Yeah but I very rarely get emails about local work - it's mostly in Cambridge which is about the hardest place in England to commute to from the NE (I think?)

I see your Cambridge and raise you with Ipswich.

Compounded by minor roadworks on the way there (not too bad on a Sunday), and major ones on the way back (Friday night so very painful).

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

Yep. I'm coming to the conclusion that the only solution is something like anyone employed via an agency and paid less than national living wage (times x say 2) should be treated as subject to SD&C anything above is not SD&C.

It's hideous (and I really don't like it) but HMRC want something simple that works, the unions who screamed during the discussion phase don't want their members forced into using limited companies and end clients will want an easy to follow rule which means they don't need to take risks.

HMRC's beef is that more people than HMG intended are getting tax relief on T&S expenses. We can assume that this is due to the fact that vast numbers of low paid workers have been forced to work through brollies or PSC's so that companies can avoid employment costs. If that's the case then why not implement something along the lines that Eek's suggested but rule that workers under a certain income threshold cannot be engaged through an intermediary - that would move them all back into permanent employment or FTC's (banning of zero hours contracts would prevent exploitation) and lots of HMRC's problems would be solved. By constantly aligning tax legislation to employment law they have to use a sledge hammer to crack a nut most of the time - if they stick with numbers all our lives will be a lot easier

[MicrosoftBob]

But then HMRC can't punish people they're jealous of