Staying in the same public sector contract after April 2017

[pscont]

Sudden panic today that the tool will come out 'on 25th Feb' and be run on every interim, with results communicating to HMRC, even if you've resigned and leaving end of March...

Any gov link that says that a contract will be evaluated before 6 April?

[northernladuk]

Any gov link that says that a contract will be evaluated before 6 April?

You'll be screwed if you you've already started after April and haven't checked to see what you are. Could be in for a nasty shock surely?

[seeourbee]

Unfortunately the world isn't ruled by internet links (contrary to what Wikipedia editors think!) but it makes perfect logical common sense that a PS organisation would start using these as soon as possible to keep 'clean'.

[londonlad]

1) £2000 is nowhere near what they could get if they fight and win.

2) Define retrospective. All investigations are retrospective, and HMRC are not going to sacrifice ongoing investigations which could do nicely.

Reading the FAQ about tax investigation on the IPSE website: "In 2011 three cases were taken to tribunal after 5, 6 & 8 years respectively and were successfully defended and resulted in crushing victories for the IPSE members. The average cost of dealing with all three cases from start to finish exceeded £19,000 and the tax liabilities ranged from £25,000 to over £60,000 – there was a lot at stake for all three members who were all very glad of IPSE’s support!"

So HMRC have a track record of suddenly going back a long way, and are fighting for much more than £2000 in each case. What does appear to be criminal is that (I think) HMRC don't get hit with having to pay your fees if they lose, which makes the whole process even more unfair.

Don't get me wrong - I think that there are many people who would jump at the chance to pay £2k to avoid an investigation into past practices. I just don't see HMRC going for it, and certainly not at that level.

That is exactly my point. Instead of investigating & contesting the case in tribunal which will cost them legal fees and more likely HMRC on losing side, its cost effective option. HMRC can collect huge sum by setting a deadline to avail this option. Also majority will pay just to save them from retro and to have peaceful sleep going forward.

[puzzler]

That is exactly my point. Instead of investigating & contesting the case in tribunal which will cost them legal fees and more likely HMRC on losing side, its cost effective option. HMRC can collect huge sum by setting a deadline to avail this option. Also majority will pay just to save them from retro and to have peaceful sleep going forward.

All in all, it simply encourages and give hope to more people to carry on tax evasion which is exactly what the hmrc wants to stop in the first place. Poor suggestion and least likely to get even recommended or heard at higher levels.

Tax amnesties in any form usually carry bad reputation and are avoided by good governments.

Not a chance !

[QCApproved]

Yours and HMRCs idea of a "Huge Sum" will differ by several '000s
We have a Public Sector that will consume an infinite amount of cash as Ann Widdiecombe pointed out on Question Time last night.

Given the number of contractors it seems to be supporting as one expense its unsurprising

[NHS1979]

One of the big agencies walked me through their version of IR35 and what to do today. They thought most roles with the NHS (non-IT) would end up inside IR35, and so if I was intent on working with the NHS as a contractor I should a) switch to an umbrella company, b) use their service to shut down my PSC, and then c) I could not be retrospectively investigated because of b). They though leaving one organisation and moving to another either side of 6th April was not needed as 'HMRC only have 6 people and go after the high rollers'.

My NHS client has been sent an email asking for a determination of my role by my agency. They say they did it as they are liable. I have said I am leaving 31 March and client will create a FTC role to replace me. Client is bemused as has no tool and says he just won't do it. Agency says HMRC won't get told results as there will be no 6th April contract.

What a mess! Lots to think over. If only there were clear answers

[Andy Hallett]

Interestingly we've had a good few determinations 'outside' in respect of NHS clients, so not all doom and gloom there.

Also WTF are the client doing asking for a determination from an agency?

[SussexSeagull]

Yours and HMRCs idea of a "Huge Sum" will differ by several '000s
We have a Public Sector that will consume an infinite amount of cash as Ann Widdiecombe pointed out on Question Time last night.

Given the number of contractors it seems to be supporting as one expense its unsurprising

Problem is the Public Sector has long given up developing it's own people so contractors are the only game in town.

[northernladuk]

Problem is the Public Sector has long given up developing it's own people so contractors are the only game in town.

Not true where I was. In fact quite the opposite. They were too eager to promote unskilled people and train them which kept dragging everything backwards. There desire to promote is why they needed contractors lol.