Staying in the same public sector contract after April 2017

[westtester]

Looking at Jobserve, I can see that UKHO are looking for contractors and the advert specifies

"They are also on the forefront of tax assurance set out by HMRC, the contractor must be willing to comply with the rules operating inside IR35."

At a maximum of £240 a day for testers or £300 a day for C# devs, who's going to bother?

[eek]

Looking at Jobserve, I can see that UKHO are looking for contractors and the advert specifies

"They are also on the forefront of tax assurance set out by HMRC, the contractor must be willing to comply with the rules operating inside IR35."

At a maximum of £240 a day for testers or £300 a day for C# devs, who's going to bother?

£575 for a Java dev makes sense £300 and I would go perm

[difficulttimes]

That is surprising that they are advertising contracts like this pre-April but I guess we better get used to it..
I still don't understand if they want those terms just employ someone on a FTC - probably too lazy to get the approvals as it is always easier recruiting a day rate contractor. Guess they will find out the hard way when they see who applies for this and other roles.

[westtester]

Well they are losing practically all their contractors this month as there was an end of August deadline for coming inside IR35 in order to continue working there.

I'm surprised at the rates as they are considerably lower than they were paying earlier this year. I don't know why they think forcing folk inside IR35 and offering a lower rate is going to tempt anyone. It should be a good indicator of what might happen to the rest of the PS after April 2017.

[nucastle]

Just turned down an agent who knew I was leaving the PS because of IR35 approaching me for a gig at the BBC in Manchester.

He pre-empted my answer about IR35 and this being no different by saying this would not be caught by IR35 as this would be operated via Reed (he was not a Reed agent) as a 'work package' which would still use my Ltd company.

Could this be how the industry is attempting to circumvent the new rules?

I still said no. Regardless of any fancy new engagement setup, it doesn't stop you getting contacted by internal compliance to see proof that correct tax is being paid and that your contract is 'acceptable'.

[northernladuk]

Just turned down an agent who knew I was leaving the PS because of IR35 approaching me for a gig at the BBC in Manchester.

He pre-empted my answer about IR35 and this being no different by saying this would not be caught by IR35 as this would be operated via Reed (he was not a Reed agent) as a 'work package' which would still use my Ltd company.

Could this be how the industry is attempting to circumvent the new rules?

I still said no. Regardless of any fancy new engagement setup, it doesn't stop you getting contacted by internal compliance to see proof that correct tax is being paid and that your contract is 'acceptable'.

Wouldn't that be something similar to the IPSE FLC offering that was floated awhile ago?
Goodbye to IR35 from FLC - Contractor Weekly

It would be interesting to ask Reed how they believe they fit in with Example 3 of the consultation?

Example 3: Contract that involves workers providing services to the public sector.
A consultancy PLC contracts to provide on-site consultancy services at the Ministry. This
consists of ten information management consultants to work in the Ministry’s policy unit for up
to six months, as well as some software and online support. The supply of ten staff in this
contract would be within the scope of the proposed measure. The consultancy would need to
use the online tool and consider the new rules. They need to operate tax and National
Insurance on the payments to the PSCs. The PSCs would need to give information to the
consultancy such as the worker’s name, address and National Insurance Number so that the
consultancy could add them to their payroll.

I think the devil is in the details with the Reed option so do a lot of digging first.

[northernladuk]

And just to add, I'm surprised but looks like the word is getting around at my client. We've got one guy leaving tomorrow and another lady who's notice has just gone in. Both started looking because of the new rules.

[youngguy]

When I get calls about PS roles now I ask their views on the April changes. Unsurprisingly all have said they don't think it will apply. This ranges from "it can't work" to " there will be a way around it" to "ah but this role is exempt". I make a point of saying I'm going nowhere near the sector until there is clarity and the rates they are currently offering will yield them no decent contractors

[jamesbrown]

Wouldn't that be something similar to the IPSE FLC offering that was floated awhile ago?

Sounds like agency BS to me. Source the meat, and worry about the details later (April, 2017).

Come April 2017, no agency is going to risk the failure to operate PAYE/NIC correctly, especially when they're clueless about the working practices. The consequences will be pretty much the same as the ITEPA on agencies engaging with sole traders. Either you're on PAYE umbrella or agency PAYE. There may be a few PS clients that stick their necks out and factor a highly specialist project as being outside IR35 (a good thing, in principle), but there won't be any agents going maverick, because they're liable, and yet clueless about the working practices. The PS is going to be a graveyard pretty soon...

[neil99]

Sounds like agency BS to me. Source the meat, and worry about the details later (April, 2017).

Come April 2017, no agency is going to risk the failure to operate PAYE/NIC correctly, especially when they're clueless about the working practices. The consequences will be pretty much the same as the ITEPA on agencies engaging with sole traders. Either you're on PAYE umbrella or agency PAYE. There may be a few PS clients that stick their necks out and factor a highly specialist project as being outside IR35 (a good thing, in principle), but there won't be any agents going maverick, because they're liable, and yet clueless about the working practices. The PS is going to be a graveyard pretty soon...

I just had a recruiter put the phone down on me when I challenged his assertion that the contracts with PS they were selling would definitely be outside of IR35.