Staying in the same public sector contract after April 2017

[LondonManc]

what happens...

1- if PS end client says everyone inside ir35 (blanket decision no ifs/buts) ...
2- PS contractor agency ABC says to contractor, leave or inside/PAYE/umbrella options etc....
3- Another agency XYZ says, come with us, we will get private assessment (where lets work out so u r deemed outside), we then declare you outside, and liability is ours if found inside, you dont have to worry, we have army of lawyers bla bla....
4- Contractor leaves the agency ABC and joins the agency XYZ, and continue working for PS client, but now as outside ir35 and agency XYX carries all the liability.

Many contractors now jumping to Agency XYZ ....

Now my question/concern is, where does this all lead to ... ?
Or is it really a genuine solution/workaround discovered ??

Agency ABC sues agency XYZ or contractors for handcuff breach. THE END

[northernladuk]

Secondly, what is the situation where the client reassesses the contract and the determination moves from outside to inside? Clearly this can happen in practice (see JLJ), but there is a difference between a year / two years / six months / at contract renewal the client reassessing the role and finding it inside (whether because the tool has changed or the circumstances or both) and the client suddenly reading up on IR35 / understanding the questions more / being cautious and deciding to reassess and finding the role is now inside IR35 mid contract.

At the moment, the only "clarity" is that the liability lies with the assessor if they get it wrong. Without final legislation and guidance from Cabinet Office (and the courts as necessary) then there are still too many unknowns for my liking.

You would think with a focus on RoS in the tool but the consensus that many clients won't accept RoS the point where the client re-considers their situation could easily be driven by one contractor attempting to pull RoS and it being refused. If that happens they have no choice to run the tool again with the new stance.

[malvolio]

If the tool gets the right answer for the wrong reason - such as, to pick one at random, the worker and client colluding to make it so - then HMRC will disregard that "evidence" and the default position of you being inside will apply. And you will owe them a few pennies in unpaid taxes.

HTH.

[NHS1979]

You constantly go on about what paperwork you've got and what you want to be safe but a common theme throughout is the lack of WP evidence. Every other post there is a new post which indicate you are in a very precarious position. You start of saying you manufacturing something to look outside, then you say client knows nothing about IR35 and just wants staff to work on projects na now you are having to tell them to make the role loser to not make it a sham. Where in any of that is the evidence to us that your previous role was nothing but part and parcel and inside?

I know you feel you've got something from QDOS (which I am pretty disappointed about if you do) but I can't help you can't see the wood for the trees here. I just can't see how you can be at higher risk unless you just ignore an inside determination and carrying on outside TBH.

Well to be fair you know precious little about my role, QDOS were given more info and determined that I'm outside but it's borderline unless I change some typically NHS working practices to be even more clearly outside. This isn't just about myself but thousands of contractors and the typical way the PS thinks and works. This is a culture change, perhaps a good one depending on your perspective. Even IT contractors get told to work at a desk, use their laptops and all the rest.

There is a genuine need for the PS to use contractors where they cannot recruit locally - I'm happy to work in that way and so solutions need to be found that are not cheating.

[LondonManc]

The more I read this thread, the more I'm convinced that some string-puller in Whitehall has read Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged and considered it to be a good target operating model.

[pscont]

If the tool gets the right answer for the wrong reason - such as, to pick one at random, the worker and client colluding to make it so - then HMRC will disregard that "evidence" and the default position of you being inside will apply. And you will owe them a few pennies in unpaid taxes.

HTH.

And can HMRC shove a few (million) pennies up their arse?
What if the client doesn't give a feck about the tool. Just agree on QDOS outside determined contract and WP.

[seeourbee]

Word from HMRC is that it IS coming to Private Sector in 12m

[MrMarkyMark]

Word from HMRC is that it IS coming to Private Sector in 12m

Word, eh?

So, they are just going to spring something, as of yet completely unproven, on to the private sector?

I'm not saying it won't happen, to say it is going to happen in 12 months is deluded.

[eek]

Word from HMRC is that it IS coming to Private Sector in 12m

Love to know your source as most people expected 24 months but given the focus on self-employment tax tomorrow its not that surprising.

Thankfully some agencies are already up to date on what needs to be done....

Actually thinking about it announcing it tomorrow makes sense. Private sector pushes back and its delayed at some point until April 2019....

[seeourbee]

Source = Someone inside HMRC