• 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.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

IR35 unfriendly wording

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

    #61
    Originally posted by Platypus View Post
    This being the case, doesn't that render all contract review services utterly pointless?
    Don't the reviews happen before the contract is accepted? Therefore the actual working practices will not be known at that point.
    "He's actually ripped" - Jared Padalecki

    https://youtu.be/l-PUnsCL590?list=PL...dNeCyi9a&t=615

    Comment


      #62
      Originally posted by Platypus View Post
      This being the case, doesn't that render all contract review services utterly pointless?
      No. If the contract is worded such that it is clear that you are an employee, then there is no wriggle room - you are an employee and need to be inside IR35.

      If the contract is worded such that there is ambiguity, or is worded so that it is clear that there is no intention for you to be an employee, then there is room to argue one way or the other, which is where the IR35 arguments happen.
      Originally posted by MaryPoppins
      I hadn't really understood this 'pwned' expression until I read DirtyDog's post.

      Comment

      Working...
      X