Staying in the same public sector contract after April 2017

[northernladuk]

Well it is the intermediary then right? Who will have insurance to cover this unlikely event. They have no 'greater powers' than they do at the moment to go after you and in some respect you are more protected. The reason the tool is not mandatory is that it will be changed along the way and what happens then? Do you have to re-take the test and then re-do your contract everytime HMRC have updated the tool? Please that is never going to happen. Also, won't forums like this promote how to 'answer' the questions? As it's not mandatory they can't use this at a tribunal judge can they and even if it was they would have to change the original 2000 IR35 legislation which they are not.

Too much guesswork and hypothesis. Why not just sit back and wait until the right people get involved and start making head nor tail of it all?

[eek]

Too much guesswork and hypothesis. Why not just sit back and wait until the right people get involved and start making head nor tail of it all?

Who are the right people?

[difficulttimes]

But the thing I don't get HMRC have had 16 years to use this legislation with little or no effect because it is such a grey area of legislation and this won't be changing with this tool nor have I read anywhere that HMRC are rolling out an army of IR35 investigators - if there was money to be sought they wouldn't have been sitting on their hands all this time.

[northernladuk]

They haven't. They brought BETs in awhile ago and have had all almost constant eye on it for most of that time. Who knows what's gone on in the background we don't know about.

There have been a few high profile IR35 cases and QDOS confirmed they've been busy with them so stuff has gone on.

[Elliegirl]

Myself and another person who I work with in my current (soon to end) PS role have the same agency. We have separately emailed them to ask their position on the changes, SCD get outs, will they stay in the PS, will they deem everybody in IR35, and they have not replied to either of us. Yes, I know (now) that they cant say what they dont know (until the 5th).. but they didnt even bother with a holding pattern email.

Pexit has already started at my gig. One of our juniors whispered to a colleague 'they are all looking for jobs!' One down so far. There is one person who remains optimistic and thinks something will happen at the last minute....

[northernladuk]

One of our juniors whispered to a colleague 'they are all looking for jobs!' One down so far. There is one person who remains optimistic and thinks something will happen at the last minute....

I have no idea what this means. Our juniors? The clients or a contractor? He's wrong for a start as many won't know it's happening.
And One down? Who? The junior?
Makes no sense to me.

[jamesbrown]

But the thing I don't get HMRC have had 16 years to use this legislation with little or no effect because it is such a grey area of legislation and this won't be changing with this tool nor have I read anywhere that HMRC are rolling out an army of IR35 investigators - if there was money to be sought they wouldn't have been sitting on their hands all this time.

This has been done to death. There are no changes in the legislation, but that's irrelevant. It's about how the legislation is policed through the balance of risk and responsibility/liability. The original IR35 proposal back in the late 90s was to have clients determine whether a contract was inside or outside, but that was killed by lobbying. Had that happened, the landscape would be very different now. Joint and several liability coupled with debt transfer provisions means that no agent/client with a minimal aptitude for the obvious will be risking their contractors working outside of IR35 unless they are extremely confident in their position. I don't doubt that some agencies will be ignorant of the risks they're taking (personally, as directors), while others may support specialised work as being outside, but the bulk of contracts are going to be declared as inside. The wider contracting industry (accountants and other legal/professional service providers) are facing the same risks to their business models, so I wouldn't read too much into their positive outlook. It has the potential to be a game changer, and it's bound to end up in the private sector.

[gables]

Maybe a daft observation, but this seems very similar to the construction industry scheme (CIS).

[Scary]

Pensions

Would it be worth doing £40k of PS work per tax year and putting it all into your pension and then making zero contributions from your non-PS work?

[eek]

Maybe a daft observation, but this seems very similar to the construction industry scheme (CIS).

I was waiting for others to put 2 and 2 together. It's why I think the talk over at IPSE regarding fighting and judicial reviews is relatively pointless - previous evidence shows that this approach is legal.