• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.

November Budget - Stop Public sector IR35 rules coming into the Private sector

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #31
    That page doesn't even detail what the changes are, it's like the union letters Mrs d000hg gets pressuring her to strike without explaining why.

    CUK had an article on it: Treasury takes over 'extend off-payroll rules' rhetoric :: Contractor UK
    That references this: Don't use Autumn Budget 2017 to extend IR35 reform, Hammond told :: Contractor UK

    But they both just talk about extending public sector changes to private without saying what they are. Was it just "you're all in IR35?"
    Originally posted by MaryPoppins
    I'd still not breastfeed a nazi
    Originally posted by vetran
    Urine is quite nourishing

    Comment


      #32
      Originally posted by poorautojobber View Post
      I'm having an optimistic day.
      Guys. If your contract is outside and more importantly your working practices are outside what are you worrying about. These clients need you as much as you need them. An employee will still cost more even with significant rate rises.
      I made this observation in another thread. Problem for the infrastructure contractors it would probably bring many more contracts in to scope; and in all fairness they probably should be - doing reactive support as a service is pretty close to permie work and being given a workload, if that's the basis of your gig. If however you are there to deliver business transformation / 100% project work then I think you shouldn't have too much to worry about.

      Comment


        #33
        Originally posted by mattfx View Post
        I made this observation in another thread. Problem for the infrastructure contractors it would probably bring many more contracts in to scope; and in all fairness they probably should be - doing reactive support as a service is pretty close to permie work and being given a workload, if that's the basis of your gig. If however you are there to deliver business transformation / 100% project work then I think you shouldn't have too much to worry about.
        It's liability - how many companies are going to risk being stung by HMRC just so they can keep you on? I'm pretty proud of what I do and I think I make an impact in most organisations I work for (Enough certainly keep in touch to make me think I'm doing something right), but I'm not naive enough to think I'm going to be considered some kind of exception by most.

        Once HMRC start delivering their scare message to businesses, reminding them of their obligation and risk I suspect many (At least initially) will simply opt for Inside. Or, they'll just go and use the big boys. One of the only places I can really compete is on price - once I'm inside IR35 I'll need to charge the best part of Capitas rates to make it worthwhile.

        Unfortunately I'd love to get a more local gig and then I wouldn't really care, but in 6 years of Permie and Contract consultancy I've had literally 3 days with a customer where I was <1hr from home.

        I'm not worried because I think I'm inside IR35 - on the contrary, I think I'm the epitome of what a contract consultant business should look like (Multiple projects, many customers, skilled, generally considered the last word in a meeting, most customers barely know what I do let alone tell me how to do it etc). I'm worried because the risk adverse nature of businesses, coupled with HMRC's deliberate intent to pressure the Inside conclusion, is likely to make contracting no longer a viable option.
        Last edited by vwdan; 14 November 2017, 17:47.

        Comment


          #34
          Maybe there's a plan B in "IR35 advisement consultancy" to the big companies scared about using contractors.
          Originally posted by MaryPoppins
          I'd still not breastfeed a nazi
          Originally posted by vetran
          Urine is quite nourishing

          Comment


            #35
            Originally posted by d000hg View Post
            Maybe there's a plan B in "IR35 advisement consultancy" to the big companies scared about using contractors.
            "As you will appreciate, the contents of the Budget are for the Chancellor, and I do not know what may or may not be in it.

            I appreciate your concerns about the impact changes to IR35 could have. Flexible labour plays an important role in the UK economy and it is necessary that the tax system recognises the different ways that individuals are working, while at the same time making sure nobody is given an unfair advantage.

            In recent years there has been a substantial increase in the number of workers engaged through an employment intermediary. While many play a legitimate role in the labour market, increasingly some market themselves, at least in part, on the basis that they allow individuals and businesses to maximise their income through claiming tax relief on home-to-work travel expenses. The increase in the use of intermediaries means that large numbers of individuals are claiming tax relief that the majority of workers cannot claim, even when they hold very similar jobs.​

            People can also use intermediaries to disguise what would otherwise be employment income. The IR35 legislation seeks to ensure that what is properly employment income is taxed as such and tackles tax and National Insurance avoidance through the use of intermediaries.

            Thank you again for taking the time to contact me.

            Kind regards

            Damian Hinds

            Response from MP.

            Seems it's coming...but somehow don't see any urgency from firms on this as they will have to bear extra costs..transferring contractors to ftc, paying off agents, managing disruption...

            Comment


              #36
              Taxed like an employee but zero employment rights.

              Why has this never been challenged?
              http://www.cih.org/news-article/disp...housing_market

              Comment


                #37
                Originally posted by PurpleGorilla View Post
                Taxed like an employee but zero employment rights.

                Why has this never been challenged?
                Somebody will be along to tell us that the enormous day rates we get make up for this....

                Comment


                  #38
                  Originally posted by jonbon View Post
                  "As you will appreciate, the contents of the Budget are for the Chancellor, and I do not know what may or may not be in it.

                  I appreciate your concerns about the impact changes to IR35 could have. Flexible labour plays an important role in the UK economy and it is necessary that the tax system recognises the different ways that individuals are working, while at the same time making sure nobody is given an unfair advantage.

                  In recent years there has been a substantial increase in the number of workers engaged through an employment intermediary. While many play a legitimate role in the labour market, increasingly some market themselves, at least in part, on the basis that they allow individuals and businesses to maximise their income through claiming tax relief on home-to-work travel expenses. The increase in the use of intermediaries means that large numbers of individuals are claiming tax relief that the majority of workers cannot claim, even when they hold very similar jobs.​

                  People can also use intermediaries to disguise what would otherwise be employment income. The IR35 legislation seeks to ensure that what is properly employment income is taxed as such and tackles tax and National Insurance avoidance through the use of intermediaries.

                  Thank you again for taking the time to contact me.

                  Kind regards

                  Damian Hinds

                  Response from MP.

                  Seems it's coming...but somehow don't see any urgency from firms on this as they will have to bear extra costs..transferring contractors to ftc, paying off agents, managing disruption...
                  Its a bit rich when a MP starts talking about expenses abuse. Does he claim for his travel and accommodation for his role?
                  Rule Number 1 - Assuming that you have a valid contract in place always try to get your poo onto your timesheet, provided that the timesheet is valid for your current contract and covers the period of time that you are billing for.

                  I preferred version 1!

                  Comment


                    #39
                    Originally posted by PurpleGorilla View Post
                    Taxed like an employee but zero employment rights.

                    Why has this never been challenged?
                    Because people don't care (Rich, tax dodging contractors) or they don't quite believe it. I've been doing my best to explain the implications of me becoming inside IR35 to the guys here but I don't think they entirely believe it's that bad.

                    Comment


                      #40
                      Originally posted by jonbon View Post
                      Seems it's coming...but somehow don't see any urgency from firms on this as they will have to bear extra costs..transferring contractors to ftc, paying off agents, managing disruption...
                      I don’t think you can read anything into that response. It’s simply the Treasury line. It’s what all constituency MPs from the governing party will ask for when replying on technical matters about which they know feck all. Standard practice. Very few will actually write a considered response. You would’ve got a similar response in the past too. That said, it was always a question of when, and not if, and it has been telegraphed in the press, so there must be a reasonable chance that it will come in the AB.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X