The Official Budget 2016 thread

[jamesbrown]

I'd happily rejoin IPSE if I felt they had any sway over how we are treated as E'ees. In the last year alone things have gone from bad to worse.

It's not always easy to judge on outcomes, though, because there are always multiple lobbying groups on different sides of any issue, and lobbying is a small piece of the overall picture that influences policy. It's difficult to know what impact they might've had most of the time, but I think it's reasonable to assume that, if they are talking to these muppets at the highest level, there's at least the possibility of influence. I'm as skeptical as anyone, but there are limited avenues. It's pretty much engage or whine, although the selective use of judicial reviews and legal action makes sense too.

[DaveB]

Well that's good to hear, but it's all cart before the horse. I had the same issue at HS2/DfT and we re-wrote my contract. IPSE had nothing to do with that.

I'd happily rejoin IPSE if I felt they had any sway over how we are treated as E'ees. In the last year alone things have gone from bad to worse.

That would be because you were contracting through an agency, who were contracting with Capita. You would never have seen the CLOne contract that underpinned the one with the agency unless you were directly contracted to Capita, as the majority of PS contractors were and still are. Even if your agency contract was re-written, in the event of an IR35 investigation HMRC would have regarded the CLOne contract as being primary in the relationship with DfT.

[teapot418]

... how we are treated as E'ees. ...

Nope, I've tried, clueless. What's an E'ee, apart from what someone from Yorkshire might say?

[seeourbee]

E'ees = Employees
E'ers = Employers

[m0n1k3r]

17% CT!

Close enough to Singapore and Hong Kong, at 16.5% and 16% respectively, although they still use remittance basis.

[d000hg]

Nope, we've got another 4 years of this crap.

And then you think it will get better? For most working people it sounded quite positive. No interest on savings even outside ISAs, even larger, more flexible ISA allowances, etc. And for typical small businesses weren't there mentions of increased NI relief and stamp duty cuts (I wasn't listening as much)? Plus falling CT gives local companies more chance against the multinationals who avoid tax here.

I'm sure a Labour budget would have hurt a lot of people a lot more.

[m0n1k3r]

Microbusiness, not tax dodging, UK destroying, enemy No.1 PSC.

Your business is a PSC if you, the director, provide the service yourself.

Now if your business, consisting of you the director, doesn't provide a service yourself, then you are a micro business.

The legal definition of a PSC is "Person with Significant Control", part of the Small Business Enterprise and Employment Act 2015. There will soon be a PSC register holding details of who the ultimate owners of companies are in order to enhance transparency.

Which makes the HMRC's homegrown use of PSC all the more confusing.

[m0n1k3r]

Based on that definition, it's more beneficial for the other half to become a director of your now non-PSC.

Wouldn't work. The spouse is a 'connected person'.

[m0n1k3r]

1.149 Public sector bodies have a responsibility to taxpayers to ensure that the people working for them are paying the right tax. From April 2017, where the public sector engages an off-payroll worker through their own limited company, that body (or the recruiting agency if the public sector body engages through one) will become responsible for determining whether the rules should apply, and for paying the right tax. This strengthens the public sector’s role in ensuring that the workers it engages comply with the rules


The agency will have to operate PAYE?

As is the definition of an Employment Business according to the conduct regulations (and it also says that employment businesses are for when the 'worker' is under the control of the hirer). Being able to use a limited company is more of an afterthought.

Perhaps agencies should stop calling themselves 'employment business' and instead use something more appropriate, such as 'contractor broker' or 'freelancer broker'.

[m0n1k3r]

Can someone explain why there is a distinction between private sector and public sector with respect to IR35? Don't hate me for the question, I've never contracted in the public sector.

The public sector has a requirement to employ people rather than using external suppliers. By forcing 'off-payroll' staff onto payroll they improve their statistics and will be able to tell the populace that they have met their targets in the next election.