IR35 win for HMRC

[Not So Wise]

You must get some sort of meaningful assurance from one of the contract vetting services that your contract is as safe as can be from this sort of thing.

....

It'd be helpful if we knew whether the poor victim had ever had his contract vetted.

You are missing the important part..one of the major things that counted against him was the agency/client contract, which there is no way to vet because rarely will you ever see it even if you ask

[malvolio]

Well said TLG.

Well, yes, I agree actually. Can't quote it here but I posted on the PCG boards to the effect that we should not be relying on sustaining poorly implemented rules to keep out of IR35 and got roundly shouted down. Seems some people prefer uncertainty!

[The Lone Gunman]

Well, yes, I agree actually. Can't quote it here but I posted on the PCG boards to the effect that we should not be relying on sustaining poorly implemented rules to keep out of IR35 and got roundly shouted down. Seems some people prefer uncertainty!

Bloody hell. Dunno what to say now.
Point me in the right direction and will support your cause.

[WotNxt]

I don't believe this is the first loss for the PCG - wasn't there that case that was heard in the poor chap's living room as he was too ill to attend court? An oil industry contractor I think.

I agree that Spring and the client should suffer the legal consequences of this and should be made to pay the tax bill the they appear to have brought on the contractor through their actions and not his.

I have tried negotiating a Spring supplied contract to bring it outside of IR35 before and failed - turned down a nice extension because of it! So Spring know all about it and basically don't care about the impact on either clients or contractors.

The reality is, though, that any action taken against agents or clients will always be spun to reflect badly on contractors. It will be used by agents to persuade ignorant clients to go along with everything the agent says and collaborate (knowingly or otherwise) in screwing contractors - as has happened here.

Having been through an IR35 investigation (luckily we passed) I know what it is like and the stress/worry/despair involved. I really feel for this person who has been screwed over - yes, they have been. If it was me then I would seriously be looking for redress from somewhere. I really hope the person involved does not lose their house, marriage, kids, etc. because of this and I wish them all the best in whatever actions they take to obtain redress.

[WotNxt]

That's where the PCG is going on behalf of the one-in seven workers in the country who are self-employed. Needless to say, HMG are ignoring that approach (and the 1 in 7 voters...) and seem to prefer levelling the taxation between us and employees, which is why we are seeing a scaling up of CT for small businesses.

Unfortunately, "1 in 7 workers" is not the same as "1 in 7 voters". Factor in all the students, unemployed, pensioners, long-term sick, etc. In fact all the groups that don't give a stuff about IR35, S660 or anything at all that us contractors have thrown at us. To them, as well as the "normally employed" we are fair game for milking for as much tax as the government can get away with so as to pay for their and their families' needs.

What we need is better PR. Stories like: "Small contractors allow government to cut billions from spending budgets by offering better value for money and higher quality" or "More money available in NHS for treatment and increased nurses pay because contractors do it better" or "Contractors take it up the **** so you can sit on yours".

Well, maybe not the last one, even though it is true - metaphorically speaking.

[malvolio]

Tell me about it. I've been banging that drum for a few years now...

[kingshuk]

The guy representing HMRC was called Peter Death....how appropriate...

Goes on to show that nothing is certain but death and taxes

[Epiphone]

And as an example of how this effects our businesses a gig just popped up in the RSS feed that would be perfect for me (and vice versa) but I didn't apply because it was from Spring.

I wonder if we could make a case that Spring is damaging business due to their unfair contract terms.

I really hope the poor guy who got stung fights back and the PCG make a big thing about the agency-client contract.

Hell, if the guy is skint set-up a Paypal jobby and we can all chuck a tenner in.

[pisces]

Spring eh, no wonder they couldn't give me an answer when I asked if my contract was IR35 friendly

[richard-af]

You are missing the important part..one of the major things that counted against him was the agency/client contract, which there is no way to vet because rarely will you ever see it even if you ask

I did get that point - really.

What I was getting at is that it's better to get something put into one's contract that gets around it. Now, how that's done is beyond my ken, but there must be a way of making it clear that in such a "chain", you will only be responsible for that which you have seen and signed. And that obviously wouldn't include any sort of "Eyes Only" contract between pimp & Client.

One for the legal elves, I think.