Crackdown on personal service companies could raise £400m in tax

[jamesbrown]

Do you mean that as in April 2016 instead of 2017 for the IR35 stuff?

I don't think they had any intention of doing that (e.g. based on the summer budget documents). Also, FB 2016 will be under review now and the first draft will appear in around a month. Essentially, I doubt it, and anything rushed would ultimately backfire, but you have to wonder, given the strength of the rhetoric. It would be easier to push through something simple/draconian that superseded both the T&S and IR35 consultations in a shorter timeframe (especially if they now have doubts about SDC working beyond the agency legislation, as that was the basis for T&S). Bottom line, I doubt it, but I would've dismissed it outright a few days ago; we'll have to wait for the AS.

[SueEllen]

My interpretation was that it would be in line with IR35 in 2017. However, given the current appetite from Gideon and friends, we could be in for further shocks yet sooner than anticipated.

Well there are rumours that IDS was going to resign if Gideon tried to force him to make cuts to universal credit

With the number of friends Gideon is making right now... I really don't fancy his chances to be the next PM.

It's actually expected by pundits that none of the usual suspects will become PM due to them causing divisions within the party - so Osborne, May and Boris are all out.

[Zero Liability]

I don't think they had any intention of doing that (e.g. based on the summer budget documents). Also, FB 2016 will be under review now and the first draft will appear in around a month. Essentially, I doubt it, and anything rushed would ultimately backfire, but you have to wonder, given the strength of the rhetoric. It would be easier to push through something simple/draconian that superseded both the T&S and IR35 consultations in a shorter timeframe (especially if they now have doubts about SDC working beyond the agency legislation, as that was the basis for T&S). Bottom line, I doubt it, but I would've dismissed it outright a few days ago; we'll have to wait for the AS.

That was my thinking, too. It looks like the soonest they will be able to manage it is April 2016, but they risk rushing it and also facing heightened resistance (because this is a huge change on the margins for loads of business models) if they do it too fast, so April 2017 is possible too. The entire approach comes across as very desperate and rushed through, but at the moment there's very few details so we're limited to conjecture.

[ShandyDrinker]

That was my thinking, too. It looks like the soonest they will be able to manage it is April 2016, but they risk rushing it and also facing heightened resistance (because this is a huge change on the margins for loads of business models) if they do it too fast, so April 2017 is possible too. The entire approach comes across as very desperate and rushed through, but at the moment there's very few details so we're limited to conjecture.

While it may be desperate and rushed through, they appear to be following the well trodden path of delivering unpopular policies/changes early on in the parliament in the hope that come election 2020, the electorate will have had time to get used to the changes and any ill will should have subsided by then. This is why I mentioned the Lib Dems and tuition fees earlier in the thread. For changes such as those being proposed, people have very long memories indeed.

They may get lucky, we may have a completely different set of things to worry about post EU referendum so a lot of this may well get forgotten.

[administrator]

Seems likely to be April 2016 as that is when the Finance Act will be enacted. But what we hear at AS and what is actually in the FA may differ. First wait for the AS and then another wait for the details of the Finance Act in April as that is where the real detail will be. Will there be any chance for lobby groups like IPSE and individual pressure on MPs from their contracting constituents to seriously consider the ramifications between AS and FA to help sway the contents of the legislation? Probably FA chance of that but you never know.

I do think that the timing of this news is exactly as jamesbrown and others have said. It is a warmer for what is to come in the Autumn Statement. Going to be an interesting six months.

[Contreras]

So, for contracts > 1 month, the choice is:

• client hires you as employee, taxed as PAYE, plus employment rights.
• client hires you as FLC, taxed as PAYE (probably), no employment rights.

Either way IR35 is history.

It's what we've been asking for, right?

[ShandyDrinker]

So, for contracts > 1 month, the choice is:

• client hires you as employee, taxed as PAYE, plus employment rights.
• client hires you as FLC, taxed as PAYE (probably), no employment rights.
  
• client hires you as employee, taxed as PAYE as if under IR35, no employment rights.

Either way IR35 is history.

It's what we've been asking for, right?

There was too little information to determine if either of the above is the case although I've added what I interpreted the article to mean.

I cannot see large corporates accepting the first item in your list. There will be plenty of lobbying to make sure that doesn't happen.

It's all pure speculation until the AS.

[MrMarkyMark]

That Guardian article is so badly written, its untrue.
It was, also, interesting that the comments weren't activated on it .

It seems like our chancellor is busy trying to grab as much as he can from, almost, everyone, not just contractors.
As others have said, we will have to wait and see what is said in the Autumn statement.
There is a lot of speculation, but I think they will find it difficult to apply everything, as they would like, as I believe it would cause too many issues for business.

I don't know where this will land, but, there seems to be a lot of fatalists on here, who seems to think the game is over, already.
I'm not saying things won't be tightened up, but, personally, I think, its far from game over.

[gisajob]

Could this be their opening 'offer'? I've thought for a while now that the only way to definitively resolve this is to draw an arbitrary line in the sand and say "This side you're fine for T&S, IR35 etc and beyond you're inside IR35" - I know it's simplistic and arbitrary but at least it would be a defined point that everyone could work with. It would work well for some, less well for others. There certainly would be less chance of finding loopholes to get around it I would think?

Anyway, up until Friday I was hoping that the best we could hope for would be 24mths (as per T&S as it currently stands) but that I would accept it being set at 1 year (if the trade off was getting rid of all the other uncertainty). Now after reading this article I think they've set their stall out and this is their opening gambit to eventually be negotiated upwards to (hopefully) 1 year but maybe somewhere in between? 3mths? 6mths?

[MrMarkyMark]

"This side you're fine for T&S, IR35 etc and beyond you're inside IR35"

They set this sort of limit in Australia, 6 months I believe.
Now business's are complaining as projects are being left in the lurch, as people always depart after 6 months.

People may consider a time limitation fine, however, it has to be appreciated, that some times you can be engaged on a big programme of work, that can run in years, rather than months.