Results of the public sector consultation is up

[jamesbrown]

We don't know what payment is the important one. Is it the one from agent to contractor or the bulk payment from public sector to agent?

There's some logic with it being the fee payer and deemed employer, so it won't be that.

[teapot418]

I would not take his advice unless he's offering to sell his assets to back it... his thinking is pretty naive to be frank.

The guidelines start from the 6th but who knows what departments may do.

Which bit of my advice to the OP is "naïve"?

Your best bet is to move to the private sector.

But if you can't do that, of the options you present, the 'best' is to move to a completely different contract with a new client. But you will need to do this before the end of March - the new legislation applies to any payment made from April, so you really need to get out by end of Feb.

If you don't already have it, take out tax investigation insurance to give you the best chance if you do get investigated.

The OP asked which of the options he presented would be best. We could just tell him, as other posters have done, that he's "fecked" and not actually answer his question.


Everyone's advice is worth what you're paying for it, and you should always DYOR and make your own judgement.

[teapot418]

Pretty sure it said brollies are specifically out of scope.

https://www.gov.uk/government/public...brella-company


50.Where an umbrella company employs the worker directly and not through an intermediary, the new off-payroll rules do not apply. Some umbrella companies do not employ the worker directly and so this should be checked. If this is not the case then the normal rules apply.

[newtothegame]

ok so if we're caught....

what payment plans (if any) do hmrc offer for back tax???

or do they simple demand it all at once and then your forced to become bankrupt

[cojak]

ok so if we're caught....

what payment plans (if any) do hmrc offer for back tax???

or do they simple demand it all at once and then your forced to become bankrupt

We don't know. No idea.

Look, you are asking specific questions for which there are no answers.

We aren't HMRC and they are they only people who know.

And they aren't telling.

So I would advice wait to find out like the rest of us.

[eek]

https://www.gov.uk/government/public...brella-company


50.Where an umbrella company employs the worker directly and not through an intermediary, the new off-payroll rules do not apply. Some umbrella companies do not employ the worker directly and so this should be checked. If this is not the case then the normal rules apply.

The problem with that statement is that contractors are not employed Department -> Umbrella -> Worker its Department -> Agency -> Umbrella -> worker.....

Now I have 2 issues with this rule:-

1) when it first appeared it was the Agency who was determining status so they could work out where the rules applied and where they didn't - that's no longer the case (the department does it) so I suspect because there are serious penalties for not determining status within 31 days departments will decide the status of all roles simply because that's easier for them to do.

2) a get out clause for umbrella's means that the not quite umbrella tax dodgy schemes will have a new market to target... and I doubt most agencies know how to tell the difference between a honest one with no kickback and a dishonest one with a large kickback...

[cojak]

2) a get out clause for umbrella's means that the not quite umbrella tax dodgy schemes will have a new market to target... and I doubt most agencies know how to tell the difference between a honest one with no kickback and a dishonest one with a large kickback...

I completely agree with this, but I would expect contractors to be caught more easily. There needs to be penalties for the providers, as the rules are more black and white.

[bobspud]

Which bit of my advice to the OP is "naïve"?



The OP asked which of the options he presented would be best. We could just tell him, as other posters have done, that he's "fecked" and not actually answer his question.


Everyone's advice is worth what you're paying for it, and you should always DYOR and make your own judgement.

The one stating that having ir35 investigation insurance make this a non issue.

[cojak]

The one stating that having ir35 investigation insurance make this a non issue.

No-one has mentioned the possibility that the New World/new rules of April 7th may make those existing policies void...

[teapot418]

The one stating that having ir35 investigation insurance make this a non issue.

If that was the impression I gave, then I apologise. It's very much an issue.

However, if you are working in the public sector, outside IR35, whether or not you intend to move to private sector, move to a different role in public sector, or stay in the same role, you would IMHO be mad not to have insurance in case, as many have suggested, HMRC do come after roles that have now been declared inside.

I also pointed out that the criteria haven't changed - the administration has. So if you are outside IR35 and your working practices don't change, then you could, if you were prepared for the stress, and had insurance (and I'd include TLC35 or equivalent in that) stick it out and if you get challenged retrospectively, fight it with a good chance of winning. I sincerely hope some people do to expose this for the farce it is, but anyone who has got the opportunity to move out should. Insurance does not make this a non-issue - it gives you a better chance of successfully fighting the issue if you have the will to do so.