The Official Budget 2016 thread

[SimonMac]

We have received this off our contact this afternoon at HMRC with regards to the Reform of the Intermediaries Legislation...

"We wanted to contact you directly about the announcement today in the Budget about the intermediaries legislation (known as IR35) which we know is of interest to you, and to thank you for your engagement with the discussion document we published last Summer on how to improve the effectiveness of the current rules.

As you may have seen, the Government announced at the Budget that it will reform the intermediaries legislation for public sector engagements. Liability to pay the correct employment taxes will move from the worker’s own company to the public sector body or agency or third party paying that company.

We thought it might be helpful to provide you with some more information about the change. The government has decided to reform the rules for the engagements in the public sector only from April 2017. Public sector bodies have a responsibility to taxpayers to ensure that the people working for them are paying the right tax.

We have published a short technical note to provide more information about the changes and we will publish a consultation before the summer. We will continue to talk with you and other stakeholders over the summer on the best way to implement this reform."

Old news, we saw that ages ago

You need a new contact

HMRC notes here:

https://www.gov.uk/government/public...es-legislation

Public sector details here - separate document...

https://www.gov.uk/government/public...es-legislation


Edit: Or wot jamesbrown said. (KUATB)

[DaveB]

I think this is going to be an example of a "third party". I can't imagine what else they'd mean by this. They talk about the nearest company in the chain being responsible so, in this example, I think the consultancy would be responsible if they contracted with a PSC. Indeed, if that weren't the case, it would be a fairly straightforward workaround to avoid the rules based on a distinction between an agency and a consultancy (which they aren't going to make).

Not necessarily, since Accenture will be charging you out to the end client for a damn site more than they are paying you. The contract with the client, if it is a genuine B2B consultancy deal between Accidenture and the client wont specify individuals, only services.

[d000hg]

By increasing the 40% tax band to 45k, are the government trying to ease the pain of the dividend tax? for somebody on 45k this year compared to 45k in 2 years is about the same now..... give with one hand and take with the other.

If you're so self-obsessed you think most HRT payers are contractors... I hardly think he'd bring in this benefit for all tax payers specifically to help out contractors who most voters know nothing about.

[swamp]

One way or another, from April 2017 IR35 is not an issue for public sector contractors.

[SimonMac]

One way or another, from April 2017 IR35 is not an issue for public sector contractors.

You are a glass half full person!

[DimPrawn]

Not necessarily, since Accenture will be charging you out to the end client for a damn site more than they are paying you. The contract with the client, if it is a genuine B2B consultancy deal between Accidenture and the client wont specify individuals, only services.

What if my wife owned the company, and I subbed my company to her, and she had a contract with Accidenture, who then placed me with a client, through an agency, that held shares in my wifes company, but she was also an employee of Accidenture, and she ran away with the client hiring manager?

[LondonManc]

Smell my finger.

He does look a lot like Adam Johnson's older brother.

[SimonMac]

If you're so self-obsessed you think most HRT payers are contractors... I hardly think he'd bring in this benefit for all tax payers specifically to help out contractors who most voters know nothing about.

Most contractors do everything they can to avoid being a HRT if they are doing things right!

[DaveB]

One way or another, from April 2017 IR35 is not an issue for public sector contractors.

Nope, it's the same issue it always was, there will just be a new set of hoops to jump though to prove it doesn't apply. The hoops may be smaller and higher off the ground, but they will still be there.

[DaveB]

What if my wife owned the company, and I subbed my company to her, and she had a contract with Accidenture, who then placed me with a client, through an agency, that held shares in my wifes company, but she was also an employee of Accidenture, and she ran away with the client hiring manager?

Then you'd be Brillopad and have my sympathy.