If you have a minute

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

Would you please mind awfully signing the petition mentioned here Contractors, petition HMRC to keep Travel & Subsistence tax relief :: Contractor UK

Thank you

(I have checked my urban dictionary before daring to post in General. Please be kind)

[SimonMac]

Would you please mind awfully signing the petition mentioned here Contractors, petition HMRC to keep Travel & Subsistence tax relief :: Contractor UK

Thank you

(I have checked my urban dictionary before daring to post in General. Please be kind)

For the inherently lazy, here is a link to the petition https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/118646

EDIT: I have signed it and so has my wife

[jamesbrown]

Fair enough, but I'm not sure about this bit without further explanation:

Using the SDC test and IR35 to gauge whether a workplace is a temporary workplace (for site-based workers) will result in many PSC and umbrella contractors being denied relief, even though those they work shoulder-to-shoulder with that are directly employed will be allowed to have T&S expenses paid free of income tax. In short, in correcting one unfairness HMRC has created another.

How will the proposed changes impact tax relief on expenses that do not involve home-to-work (H2W) travel, i.e. "ordinary commuting"? If an employee can receive relief (e.g. for attending an offsite meeting from a client site), I can't imagine a situation where that relief wouldn't be available for a contractor, going forward, even if they are working through an umbrella and subject to SDC or through a PSC and subject to IR35. This is about "ordinary commuting", surely?

I can see the argument about a flexible workforce. I can see the argument about the lack of a level playing field vs. consultancies. I can't immediately see the argument about employees being in a favoured situation following these changes.

[VectraMan]

WHS. It's cobblers. I'd support it if you were arguing for a level playing field: perhaps all workers whether employees or contractors get to claim travel to their regular place of work for the first 2 years. But you're arguing for contractors being a special case; for being able to pretend their home is their regular place of work whilst going 5 days a week to the same office for 2 years.

And it only applies to inside IR35 people anyway.

[Pondlife]

And it only applies to inside IR35 people anyway.

First they came for the brolly users.

Dangerous attitude for any contractor to take IMHO. We got away with it this time but we're yet to see what IR35 v2 looks like and "the right to SDorC" must look mighty tempting.

[SlipTheJab]

At the end of the day its HMRCs response to brollies taking the p!ss with the T&S rules to inflate pay packets of temps etc, I think its fair that if you're IR35 caught or 'employed' via a brolly you can't claim expenses in the same way that when I was permie I couldn't claim for travel from my home to my workplace.

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

At the end of the day its HMRCs response to some brollies taking the p!ss with the T&S rules to inflate pay packets of temps etc, I think its fair that if you're IR35 caught or 'employed' via a brolly you can't claim expenses in the same way that when I was permie I couldn't claim for travel from my home to my workplace.

FTFY I would argue that there are many brolly workers who are doing the same job in the same way as a PSC worker outside IR35 they're just using a different payment vehicle

[Pondlife]

FTFY I would argue that there are many brolly workers who are doing the same job in the same way as a PSC worker outside IR35 they're just using a different payment vehicle

That's not true. They've got all that extra supervision, direction or control to help them along.

The rest of us have to wing it.

[Lost It]

In the same way that sub contractors are "used then thrown away" as and when required?

In my trade there is no guarantee of work. So if I need to drive 100 miles to work at three hours a day then surely it's no different to the company car "benefit" that many people have? OK there's "tax" involved in that case too, but in my case without this relief I have to pay for everything from insurance to tyres to servicing. If this relief is removed, there are some that will simply stop being the "flexible work force" because it simply won't be worthwhile. I'll be one of them.

What I suspect will happen is that rates will go up to cover the costs of transport.

Or our "flexible friends" will simply decide on a limit as to how far they will travel. Who wins then.

I've signed BTW. I still think that when big business is telling HMRC what tax they are prepared to pay that the contractor expenses is small beer frankly. It is a system that wasn't broken to start with. Whereas the big business model most certainly is.

Doesn't really effect me as far as I can tell...

[original PM]

In the same way that sub contractors are "used then thrown away" as and when required?

In my trade there is no guarantee of work. So if I need to drive 100 miles to work at three hours a day then surely it's no different to the company car "benefit" that many people have? OK there's "tax" involved in that case too, but in my case without this relief I have to pay for everything from insurance to tyres to servicing. If this relief is removed, there are some that will simply stop being the "flexible work force" because it simply won't be worthwhile. I'll be one of them.

What I suspect will happen is that rates will go up to cover the costs of transport.

Or our "flexible friends" will simply decide on a limit as to how far they will travel. Who wins then.

I've signed BTW. I still think that when big business is telling HMRC what tax they are prepared to pay that the contractor expenses is small beer frankly. It is a system that wasn't broken to start with. Whereas the big business model most certainly is.

Doesn't really effect me as far as I can tell...

Your argument falls because most people will accept higher and higher taxes and will do pretty much anything to not end up in living on the streets.

HMRC are solely interested in taking as much as they can - in an ideal world everyone would work 7am to 8 pm, eat lentils and water, go to bed at 9, work until they are 75, stay fit and then die.

it would be better for the rich and fook the not rich (which is us lot by the way)