Staying in the same public sector contract after April 2017

[hollyblue]

Got collared on the way out of work by a director working for the big boss. This director line manages 10 people, has been there 2 years, was bought out of her agency contract by the CCG.

Still trying to persuade me to stay. Saying I could be hosted by a sister public body, but doing same job for original client. Also I should get stationary and use my own laptop etc.

I tried to explain about working practices, making a clean break, umbrella companies and the like - she looked at me like I lived in a survivalist bunker in the Nevada desert awaiting world war three.

Nothing they can offer me, in or out, at same body or sister body, sounds as good to me as clean break, new end client, new role, new agency, using an umbrella and just paying the tax till I see if outside IR35 roles do emerge.

This lady is going to get hammered if she is investigated

There's some staggering ignorance out there STILL even at this late stage! I have to admit that until November I was far less enlightened about the way in which I am running by business. It is incumbent upon me to educate and protect myself but end users and agencies do not stand to make the financial loss that we as contractors do, so the only way they are going to educate themselves is when they realise they've got no staff left.

We've got to play the long game ... I just hope it doesn't take too long!

[anonymouse]

Totally agree, one the big agencies in my area of expertise is unable to fathom why I am asking for my terms of engagement to be agreed by the end user prior to a) me agreeing to take the contract and b) I am making such a fuss before 6.4.17! I agree with someone else who said some time on the bench is necessary while PSBs and agencies catch up with the game!

Spoke to a PS pimp today for another role, in a different client & agency. They are a smaller agency, but very well aware of the changes. When it got around to the day rate, they mentioned it being outside. Client is also aware of the changes, and have already decided to make changes, it seems they'd rather change working practices and have people available, they've also increased the rate as well. 5 minutes after the call ended, I had an email from him stating that the role has already been reviewed and agreed as outside IR35.

[northernladuk]

Do you believe them though?

[anonymouse]

Do you believe them though?

Are you saying that agents don't always tell the truth? Shock horror !!!!!

Also read today..

“An online tool that will help public sector bodies to determine whether or not the rules apply...will provide certainty and clarity”, the Treasury says.

The tool -- the Employment Status Service -- was expected to be released yesterday but it did not emerge. Anecdotal reports state that a test began but the tool buckled when 25 people used it all at once.

[Andy Hallett]

Not really. It's a tool to help decide that's all. Bearing in mind they wrote it if it does determine they are outside it would be pretty stupid of them to investigate though.

HMRC told me, in front of 20 other people, "they would stand behind the decision" of the tool.

[Andy Hallett]

HMRC have said that they would abide by it, but I suspect that we know the value of their word.

I would want something in the contract that says that the client has determined the role is outside IR35 and that in the event of HMRC deciding otherwise that the payer is liable. I'm sure that the operating guidance will make it all clear though

The payer is liable, not the contractor, it's very clear.

[psychocandy]

My hyper anxiety about retro grab means I won't even take an outside IR35 extension or role in the same or a sister organisation. Client and agency helpful and think I am nuts - I am convinced would be better to break the link completely by having new job, new client, new agency, and deliberately take one of the 90% of roles I expect will be inside, and then switch to an umbrella company. Already have the insurance and gotten my contracts and working practices reviewed by QDOS. I am in a minority though - most contractors are not as paranoid as me.

Doing it on good terms though as client and agency have been good. I might regret being so cautious but that's life

QDOS TLC35 - just saying like. Peace of mind for retro investigations for the price of a days billing....

Seb - I should be on commission here! :-)

[psychocandy]

Do you believe them though?

anonymouse - see my other thread. Anyone can SAY anything? Its just deciding what is official and enforceable...

It seems to be getting like this with agencies. Role comes up and they either plead ignorance or try and tell you it doesnt apply. Seems to be the approach a lot are taking to get contractors into PS roles - cross fingers and hope.

After all, verbal confirmation means nothing. I fully suspect even an emailed confirmation from the agency of role being outside the new rules may well not be enforceable.

I suspect it'll be a case of "Ah sorry, we made a mistake it is inside" and then walk away from it from the agency.

[bobspud]

HMRC told me, in front of 20 other people, "they would stand behind the decision" of the tool.

Andy you might want to look at the other great people they have lied to in the past.

The one thing HMRC are consistent of is lying and or blatantly changing their story when caught out.

I would rather trust my laptop bag to a drug user in a park than take their policy team at their words.

In fact the only ones they seem not to be able to affect are the large corporations that should be paying this tax.

They are dysfunctional and deeply in need of rebuilding from scratch.

[Andy Hallett]

Staying in the same public sector contract after April 2017

The common letter I have started to receive (from NHS) organisations is one saying everyone is inside unless they say otherwise. Whilst this might sound blunt on first reading it's actually a perfectly sensible thing for them to do. As an organisation if they don't tell a third party to operate OPR then they become liable for the Tax and NI in the event the rules should have been applied.