Clueless .....

[rootsnall]

I'm with the majority, if I was the agent I would conveniently lose your CV. I reckon my IR35 bill moving forward will be about 5K per annum ( + interest + penalties ? ). Is it worth ruling out well paid contracts to avoid the risk of shelling out, I don't think so.

[Sockpuppet]

[DANGER ALERT! DANGER ALERT!]...

The offical warning on this forum is "Danger Will Robinson, Danger!"

[DodgyAgent]

This afternoon I got a pimp call for gig perfect for me. Apparently, I have all the right experience, I was the only person they could find for the gig to put forward for.... blah ....blah ....blah!

Rate seems Ok and I asked him - are their contracts IR35 exempt with the three big clauses inserted [and spelt out]... blah...blah!! I only work on a b2b basis, as my business profile stipulates.

Yeah, yeah! We have about 50 contactors on site there, and they are all au fait with the terms.

[What that has to do with anything I'll never know....]

Was the on site working relationship in accordance with these IR35 friendly terms, I asked him........

Yeah, yeah! he replied [unconvincingly]. By the way, he added, will you be available on a full time basis to commit to 5 days per week with nothing else getting in the way? [DANGER ALERT! DANGER ALERT!]...

I assume then, [heart sinking but starting to entrap him] that the client will not expect hours stipulated on the contract or days either? I then spelt out my own flexible working policy to cover working hours but not rigidly spelt out in terms of hours and days per week.

Was his response. We ALWAYS stipulate 5 days per week on our contracts, but not hours, and the job will be based in.......and the client expects 8 hours per day on weekdays.

But what if the client doesn't have any work during some part of any week. I need to know what I am there for, and what I am going to be doing to justify the contract length.

No, he replied, you just have to be there 5 days per week and bill for this. They will provide the work for that time. It doesn't need to be stipulated up front.

This time it's me.

But, I said, I thought you said the client knew that the contact terms would be B2B not perma temp terms likely to fail ir35? The client will have to provide me with a Schedule of Works outlining what he wants me to do for the contract length. Otherwise, why hire a contractor?

That's not possible, he replied. We only work on a time and materials basis, not a deliverables basis, he said.

I thought your contracts were Ir35 friendly? I 'm now glaring at the receiver.?

They are.....he replied.....all our 50 contractors on site there have had no problems......[yawn, yawn]

But they don't seem to be, if the on-site working conditions seem that rigid to me. Otherwise, all these wonderful contractors you keep comparing me with are probably paying themselves salary and divis but are likely to be inside ir35 not outside, if what you are describing to me, what I would also expect to find.

No....not at all. This is illegal now that the new rules have come in. All our contractors on site there don't pay themselves salary and divis, that's not allowed under the new rules.

What new rules, I asked [ir35 has been around since 2000, so it's hardly new?]

In for the kill.....

How can that arrangement be compatible with ir35 friendly contracts and working on site practice reflecting these exempt terms, as you said they were at the start of this discussion?

.....er....I think we'd better leave it there.. It doesn't seem that you are likely to fit in with the culture of this client.

OH YOU ARE SO RIGHT [YOU PRAT]

-------

Moral of this sorry, time wasting saga...

If the pimp says that the contract is ir35 friendly, don't believe a word they say until you've probed deeper (scratching the surface very lightly, I mean - you really don't need to have the interrogation skills of Jeremy Paxman). This is not the first time I've discovered that the pimps haven't a clue what they're talking about or else they are deliberately talking out of their arse to get you over to the client.

If you think about it, it's hardly surprising that the genuine no MOO no obligation to provide work during the week for no billing,typical of a real business, wouldn't appeal to an EB. After all, it would affect their commission.

What they don't realise is that you often work longer, making them more money in the process. In my last gig I was well outside ir35 by miles and I ended up billling about 10K over the usual 9-6 5 day a week office week.

The agency is question is Hays IT who will now be duly crossed off my addy list along with Computer People.

Why oh Why did'nt the agent just put the phone down and find a contractor prepared to work on the clients terms?

[DodgyAgent]

The agency is question is Hays IT who will now be duly crossed off my addy list along with Computer People.

Lucky sods. How do I get my agency onto Denny's "prefer not to deal with" list?

[Burdock]

At least Denny can sleep soundly without worrying at night about those HMRC blackbirds pecking...

Many of us are just living in hope...and hope....

[threaded]

Denny, I hear what you are saying, I too work as my own business. Yet, the Inland Revenue tar everyone with the same brush so it just plain doesn't matter if you go well out of your way to be outside IR35, the IR will still judge you to be inside, and then you have to prove you are outside.

Hence, what many do is take the attitude: why not make the money and if the IR come calling then fight them. If I lose, and it's a big IF, I've still made more money than if I refused those contracts.

HTH

[DodgyAgent]

I'm glad I've seen this thread - it's pretty obvious that many of you are colluding with the service providers, accountancies and so on that the reason why most of you are in this game is simple:

TAX AVOIDANCE

It seems clear to me that most of you should in fact be employed on a fixed term basis - paid pro rata salaries and given the rights you deserve to have.
There is no way on earth that your mentality expressed above by everyone except
There is no way that your mentality is either business-like (ie. typical of what most limited co. operate under).

You seem to fail to understand me completely.

When I went into business on my own account I wanted to do what business owners do.......be in business on my own account. Not act as if I am temporary engaged as a second class employee with no rights on site at the client's offices. When I work to my own clients I normally can and do. I fail to see why it should be any different being sourced through an EB.

You all talk to me as if I don't know what the client wants and need telling.

Don't you think I am already aware of that?

Yes, I do turn a lot of work down that doesn't comply with my own business terms. That's because I want to work on my own account, not on someone else's terms.

What is so apparent about this discussion is that EBs and clients want their cake and eat it too - that's why IR35 was introduced and that's why there is a big issue over the MSC issue.

Unfortunately, it the mentality that most of you hold that made this legislation and all its worries and concerns possible and what will ultimately floor the contracting and freelancing industry sooner or later.

Hopefully, you won't drag me down with you and everyone else who genuinely wants to operate as a bona fida business and take risks to work as they choose in such a manner that doesn't affect the client or the efficient running of my own business.

We do understand you completely. You are an arrogant fool who believes that the world revolves around you alone.

Clients use contractors to carry out work on a 9-5 basis five days a week that is what they want. Agents facilitate this requirement (well or badly, but that is immaterial). You on the other hand expect both parties to work under your terms, and woe betide them if they do not.. You after all know best.

If you have a business that offers something different then I suggest that you go out and f****** sell it. We (clients and agecies)are not under any moral or commercial obligation to dance to your tune which if one looks at it is nothing more than enabling you to avoid paying tax.


And if "Clearly the EB industry that deal with contractors is a sham and shouldn't exist under its current model at all. (Something I've been saying all along)." this is true then why not prove that what you are saying is not just an empty whine and come up with a better alternative.

If you are truly a business then you need a to employ and train salespeople/marketers to go and sell it, the rest of the world does not owe you a living.

[Rantor]

I'm glad I've seen this thread - it's pretty obvious that many of you are colluding with the service providers, accountancies and so on that the reason why most of you are in this game is simple:

TAX AVOIDANCE

If so - so what? Really, what is the problem with this? Is operating legally, within the law so wrong these days?

Anyway, I believe most of the board seem to be taking a managed-risk view to keep revenue flowing - is that not a businesslike approach?

The issue of 'real' business vs. temps is probably never going to be agreed upon here. What clarified things for me was starting up another business, with other people that involved a bit more than punting my skills. It is a wee bit harder than shouting about being a 'real' business while effectively being self-employed.

[threaded]

BTW my solution to IR35 was to choose a taxation system where the rules were written down.

[andy]

I believe all contractors fall under ir35 except those who work from home all the time.
Otherwise everyone else has to be in office, use client's computer, do the work assigned to him etc.
We are all temps not a business. get over it.