Staying in the same public sector contract after April 2017

[eek]

No, you can't.

He isn't talking about renewing the current contract or even staying in the same department. He's talking about getting a new contract somewhere else

[Semtex]

Sorry, re-read that properly. You can, but will deffo be caught with no expenses post April regardless. IT's your choice if that makes the new gig viable of course.

why not?

[mudskipper]

If you have signed working practices that you are outside and have a certificate from Qdos and had a contract review and you leave before April, I think you should be fine

If you have all those in place, then you'd be in a great position to challenge any 'inside' decision from the tool. Whether you want to put yourself in that position is another matter.

[malvolio]

He isn't talking about renewing the current contract or even staying in the same department. He's talking about getting a new contract somewhere else

Agreed, and edited already...

Why not?

Because an inside IR35 gig can't claim expenses to your normal place(s) of work.

[Semtex]

If you have all those in place, then you'd be in a great position to challenge any 'inside' decision from the tool. Whether you want to put yourself in that position is another matter.

exactly

[northernladuk]

If you have all those in place, then you'd be in a great position to challenge any 'inside' decision from the tool. Whether you want to put yourself in that position is another matter.

I thought there was a comment that 3rd party reviews don't count now? Challenging the PS on anything when they are so risk averse is going to be difficult what you have. They wont understand.

[Semtex]

Agreed, and edited already...



Because an inside IR35 gig can't claim expenses to your normal place(s) of work.

Agreed

My main point (not very well made sorry) is that to remove some of the risk I will leave March. I will look for other opportunities some of which will be PS roles (be a lot about I think) - If the new role is inside I need to decide if the rates etc make it attractive enough to take it (yes I may be reducing my income slightly), if its outside the great. Main reason to leave current gig in march is to minimise the risk of being on the radar..

[jamesbrown]

exactly

It will probably only happen when they decide to pursue someone retrospectively (for a long period) whose contract is re-evaluated in April. Most people will either accept it or leave, going forward. For a long retrospective assessment, someone will be forced into defending themselves. Personally, I can't see them doing this, other than quite sparingly (although I know eek and others disagree), because each one is case-specific (there are no aggregated assessments for IR35, just principles established through case law), they still have limited resources, and any loss will undermine the forward looking assessment/tool, unless there are changes in working practices.

[eek]

It will probably only happen when they decide to pursue someone retrospectively (for a long period) whose contract is re-evaluated in April. Most people will either accept it or leave, going forward. For a long retrospective assessment, someone will be forced into defending themselves. Personally, I can't see them doing this, other than quite sparingly (although I know eek and others disagree), because each one is case-specific (there are no aggregated assessments for IR35, just principles established through case law), they still have limited resources, and any loss will undermine the forward looking assessment/tool, unless there are changes in working practices.

But your assumption there is:

1. All people fight
2. HMRC don't have a plan to cope with it

I suspect HMRC would be perfectly happy to send 25,000 letters accept the money from the 15,000 or so they scare into paying up and letting IPSE and qdos work out how to fight the other 10,000 claims.

HMRC can always withdraw claims against those with the best arguments leaving say 5000 to sit in no mans land waiting for a tribunal.

And remember HMRC have just bankrupted someone based on a tax query dating back from 2001. Stating that we are happy to spend 15 years with this enquiry hanging over you head is going to scare a lot of people into paying up....

[jamesbrown]

But your assumption there is:

1. All people fight
2. HMRC don't have a plan to cope with it

I suspect HMRC would be perfectly happy to send 25,000 letters accept the money from the 15,000 or so they scare into paying up and letting IPSE and qdos work out how to fight the other 10,000 claims.

HMRC can always withdraw claims against those with the best arguments leaving say 5000 to sit in no mans land waiting for a tribunal.

And remember HMRC have just bankrupted someone based on a tax query dating back from 2001. Stating that we are happy to spend 15 years with this enquiry hanging over you head is going to scare a lot of people into paying up....

I'm not making those assumptions w/r to the first point, namely that this is more likely the source of a test case, because there's much more at stake for the contractor. Once you have a test case, it's impossible to say what a judge might rule w/r to the online tool or process, but they have no problem in ruling against HMG where appropriate. If you're looking for parallels, take a look at the folks that are fighting schemes. If HMRC are imposing full tax, interest and penalties for a long retrospective period, it leaves people with little option other than to fight.