Solving the IR35 and AWR complexities. And a new business model to wit.

[gingerjedi]

Fortunately it is just 'proposed'...

Is it? Where?

[cojak]

Is it? Where?

See the first post.

[Ignis Fatuus]

A proposed solution for temporary worker law for purposes of employment and tax law. And the much desired new business model for genuine self-employed.

'If the worker is paid directly or indirectly by a recruitment agency, then the worker is classed as a temporary employee for both tax and employment law regulations.'

How would it be decided which party is the employer?

[BobTheCrate]

No they would be a supplier separate from the relationship. the contractors wouldn't be paid via agencies but direct. However via a nod & a wink the contractor would be their responsibility. Just like a rental management agent.

That'd be an interesting scenario in itself Vetran. But ...

A recruitment agency acting as a rental management agent to avoid the temp being classed as an employee; wouldn't stand up to much scrutiny at all.

i) Given the purpose for such a management company is to provide the hirer with temps, it is difficult to believe that requirement would not be present in the contract between hirer and agent. Unless they conspire to lie in the written contract - a rather dangerous and risk full move.

ii) And under that contract the hirer would be paying the agency (sorry .. management rental company) a fee.

And those two easily discovered facts would satisfy the proposal for an employee relationship with the temp.

iii) I can't believe any agency (whatever they called themselves) allowing any temp anywhere near the hirer without a contract between temp and agency.

[Old Greg]

How would it be decided which party is the employer?

Rock-paper-scissors. Best of three.

[gingerjedi]

See the first post.

Yeah I can see that, is the OP the proposer then?

Who GAS what BobTheCrate has to say?

I must be missing something shirley??

[BobTheCrate]

How would it be decided which party is the employer?

Same as it is now I guess. Whoever benefits from the work being performed and whoever is paying for the work; provided there is a recruitment agent in the chain.

[vetran]

the simple answer is to follow the Australian system that has a check-list based on actual business structure and behaviour.

do you have employees? > wife as cosec = allow some dividends
Do you have proper businesses premises ? yes = allow some dividends
do you have multiple customers? > 2 =allow some dividends (depending on split)

or provide a single trader ltd structure that allows some limited tax planning, I thought the fixed rate vat would be it.

All this converting to employees is a mess. You get the worst of both worlds.

I would say allow single non employees as contractors but IP & autonomy has to be registered with them. So companies can't force them to be single employer resources. If you want exclusivity then you pay proper tax & maintenance bit like a marriage.

Employers then make a choice, hire as a employee and own them + pay for them or as a contractor and get their expertise only.

[tractor]

...

See the first post.

I did, several times and it really is not clear whether it's a proposal or a troll. If it's the former a little background would be good and if it's official it should be attributed