Results of the public sector consultation is up

[eek]

I'm currently working on a public sector gig that ends 31st March with final invoices to be paid after April.

HR are talking to legal & commercial departments to see if the gig will be deemed inside the 'off payroll' system. Before I asked the question they had no knowledge of the change.

Agent states they believe (hope) that further clarification will be issued in the new year and that the decision will be based on your day rate. The thinking being that a day rate equivalent to an employee will be deemed off payroll, higher rates will be classified as specialist and therefore exempt. Can't see this myself.

Spoke to one other contractor here about the change and he states it won't impact him as he carries his own phone to meetings....

However, when the worse case scenario is paying tax on your £400 a day rate, life isn't that bad to be honest.

The worry would be that HMRC use the deemed inside Ir35 payment from April as an excuse to look at the contract as a whole and chase you for back payment of the entire contract.

Prior to the actual announcement stating until march 31st wasn't an issue now that all payments made after April 7th have to be tested I'm not so sure.

[coolhandluke]

I've considered this and have agreed with the agent to reduce the 30 day payment terms or I end the gig early. I won't risk going over the deadline date regardless of the HR review.

The client is looking to recruit more contractors though and believes there will be little or no impact..

[eek]

I've considered this and have agreed with the agent to reduce the 30 day payment terms or I end the gig early. I won't risk going over the deadline date regardless of the HR review.

The client is looking to recruit more contractors though and believes there will be little or no impact..

I suspect it's not the agent paying you that is the test here more it's when the public sector client pays the agent. Granted we don't know this for sure but I would be very interested in the opinions of others

[Andy Hallett]

Nope agency pays employer NI see https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...ers-4U-ltd.pdf

The agency does pay over the employers NI, however its deducted out of the PSC's (The employer) gross payment.

[eek]

The agency does pay over the employers NI, however its deducted out of the PSC's (The employer) gross payment.

Yep should have been clearer there. The agency will be paying it from within the amount the agency received from the end client... That of course won't be coming from the agency's commission so would come from whats left (i.e. top slicing what is going to the contractor's limited company)....

[marius123]

The agency does pay over the employers NI, however its deducted out of the PSC's (The employer) gross payment.

I guess this depends on how you look at it. Someone has to pay for the employers ni. I know an agency talking about 'reducing rates' to cover it and contractors who work for it asking for increases. All semantics really isn't it

[youngguy]

However, when the worse case scenario is paying tax on your £400 a day rate, life isn't that bad to be honest.

Don't forget as well as the tax there is NI (employers) and no expenses. Not the end of the world but for some it's quite a hit if they have high expenses.

[chopper]

Perhaps the next step in the PS is more contractors.

Of course, we wouldn't be talking about contractors on day rates higher than permie day rates, but contractors on day rates the same as permie day rates. Just as a mechanism of getting them off payroll and therefore no holiday pay, sick pay, redundancy rights, (m|p)aternity leave, pension rights, etc.

Permies, but forced into a contracting way of life, and it would be guaranteed that the full wodge of employment taxes would be paid.

This sounds like the kind of thing a tribunal would knock on the head as being disguised employment in the same way as the Uber ruling, so therefore it is only natural that ANY bum on seat in the PS would be entitled to full employment rights, as if they were a Fixed Term Employee. The rate you are getting should be irrelevant.

This could easily be abused by the PS to remove people out of employment rights, and so I just don't see the legislation standing and I'd be surprised if the unions aren't already working on it - not for our benefit, but to avoid the PS effectively forcing incorporation out of any permie headcount.

[seeourbee]

Not the end of the world but for some it's quite a hit if they have high expenses.

It's sad to hear that as I think it illustrates you don't get the business model we work on. Just like HMT and BIES, the so called "champions" of small businesses.

[SueEllen]

Perhaps the next step in the PS is more contractors.

Of course, we wouldn't be talking about contractors on day rates higher than permie day rates, but contractors on day rates the same as permie day rates. Just as a mechanism of getting them off payroll and therefore no holiday pay, sick pay, redundancy rights, (m|p)aternity leave, pension rights, etc.

Permies, but forced into a contracting way of life, and it would be guaranteed that the full wodge of employment taxes would be paid.

This sounds like the kind of thing a tribunal would knock on the head as being disguised employment in the same way as the Uber ruling, so therefore it is only natural that ANY bum on seat in the PS would be entitled to full employment rights, as if they were a Fixed Term Employee. The rate you are getting should be irrelevant.

This could easily be abused by the PS to remove people out of employment rights, and so I just don't see the legislation standing and I'd be surprised if the unions aren't already working on it - not for our benefit, but to avoid the PS effectively forcing incorporation out of any permie headcount.

Eek, myself and a few others saw this immediately.

If you have a contract in the PS join a union so you can demand equal rights. You may be the ideal test case. After all why shouldn't you have a decent pension or decent parental leave?