Results of the public sector consultation is up

[teapot418]

Oh aye. I'm looking out now, however as i said the field i am in, contracts tend to not come up terribly often, but when they do they are decent enough and tend to last quite a while.

So if i get another gig between now and the end of March then fantastic. Its Adios Amigos to the PS client i'm with now. BUT, if i dont, then i dont particularly want to jump ship with nothing to go to and risk being on the bench for months.

Hence being within IR35 in my current role (until such times as i get a non PS gig) would be more preferential than no contract at all. (Half a cake is better than no cake, etc).

So, my thinking is jump soonish into a PAYE environment, which my agency will facilitate (Reed), hence by the cut off date i'm already inside IR35 and thus theoretically not subject to the "test" come April, and the ensuing "list" that might generate to HMRC.

daemon, do you believe your working practices put you inside IR35? If so, then yes, you should pay up.

If not, then take out appropriate tax investigation cover, and stand your ground. If you declare yourself inside from "now", then surely you're admitting that you should have been inside all along. If it's your client that makes that decision for you, then, if your belief is different, you can challenge it.

Either the gig is IR35 caught or it's not (yes I know it's never that simple) - the criteria about when IR35 should apply has not changed.

Unless you go brolly, the test will still apply as the client will need to instruct the agent to deduct PAYE taxes.

[seeourbee]

Can anyone recommend a good IR35 cover ?

[seeourbee]

The tests are new though, so can you apply these tests retrospectively ?

[daemon]

daemon, do you believe your working practices put you inside IR35? If so, then yes, you should pay up.

If not, then take out appropriate tax investigation cover, and stand your ground. If you declare yourself inside from "now", then surely you're admitting that you should have been inside all along. If it's your client that makes that decision for you, then, if your belief is different, you can challenge it.

Either the gig is IR35 caught or it's not (yes I know it's never that simple) - the criteria about when IR35 should apply has not changed.

Unless you go brolly, the test will still apply as the client will need to instruct the agent to deduct PAYE taxes.

As per my question yesterday, my original role, i'd be fairly certain that its outside of IR35, however the extension they have given me (as of 22nd Dec 16) is moving me into work activities that may well not pass the test come April.

As for "standing my ground", then if you mean when faced with a full on investigation - well, frankly i dont want those intrusive sociopaths trawling through my life, even if i believe that i can justify my previous outside of IR35 stance.

Thus - and i think you've answered it with your last paragraph - my question was, if i go brolly in advance of April 6th, then in theory that prevents the test being applied as i am not working through a limited company at that point?

So is that "safer" than letting it all fly to April 6th and converting THEN - relative to perhaps ending up on some list for possible investigation because i flipped only at that point?

[daemon]

My concern would be that HMRC will look at 2 things.

1) How you were paid in April 2017 onwards
2) how you were paid before then - paying particular attention to the agency sending your NI details to HMRC through the agency reporting tool...

It may well be that HMRC won't look at the PS department you are in and go yep check retrospectively but rather they may look at the agency reporting side of things and go same agency so chances are same end client lets investigate (I also suspect but don't quote me on this as I have no insider knowledge that the agency payment reporting system is the easiest data set to cross reference)....

Now if you are on payroll directly with Reed it won't be a problem (you will disappear from the reports and won't be an issue) if you use an umbrella you may not be any better off...

Agreed. It depends on when / if / how HMRC were to investigate the PS department / agency / individual and what they see as the triggers for that.

With relation to 2), then if you arent operating as a limited company on the 6th April (because you're PAYE or umbrella) then they have no requirement to apply the test, thus there is no requirement to pass any details on to HMRC because of a sudden change from outside to inside IR35.

Yes, if they were to take the view "well lets look at if people were previous in this PS, and how / when they have been outside / inside IR35" then changing this year could raise a question mark, but i guess the question is - and nobody knows - how much safer is that position than flying to the wind and being forced into IR35 come April 6th?

[eek]

Agreed. It depends on when / if / how HMRC were to investigate the PS department / agency / individual and what they see as the triggers for that.

With relation to 2), then if you arent operating as a limited company on the 6th April (because you're PAYE or umbrella) then they have no requirement to apply the test, thus there is no requirement to pass any details on to HMRC because of a sudden change from outside to inside IR35.

Yes, if they were to take the view "well lets look at if people were previous in this PS, and how / when they have been outside / inside IR35" then changing this year could raise a question mark, but i guess the question is - and nobody knows - how much safer is that position than flying to the wind and being forced into IR35 come April 6th?

You are guessing how they are going to go around identifying people - and we can't guess what approach they will use but there are multiple options so don't assume your plan will work. What I will add is those closest to the ground in that area are adopting a safety first approach of not being there come April....

[eek]

daemon, do you believe your working practices put you inside IR35? If so, then yes, you should pay up.

If not, then take out appropriate tax investigation cover, and stand your ground. If you declare yourself inside from "now", then surely you're admitting that you should have been inside all along. If it's your client that makes that decision for you, then, if your belief is different, you can challenge it.

Either the gig is IR35 caught or it's not (yes I know it's never that simple) - the criteria about when IR35 should apply has not changed.

Unless you go brolly, the test will still apply as the client will need to instruct the agent to deduct PAYE taxes.

Even if you go brolly that won't stop the end client having to determine whether the role is inside or outside.... You are still someone being paid off payroll - using a brolly just means you are paying the appropriate rate of tax if inside...

[teapot418]

Even if you go brolly that won't stop the end client having to determine whether the role is inside or outside.... You are still someone being paid off payroll - using a brolly just means you are paying the appropriate rate of tax if inside...

Pretty sure it said brollies are specifically out of scope.

[bobspud]

daemon, do you believe your working practices put you inside IR35? If so, then yes, you should pay up.

If not, then take out appropriate tax investigation cover, and stand your ground. If you declare yourself inside from "now", then surely you're admitting that you should have been inside all along. If it's your client that makes that decision for you, then, if your belief is different, you can challenge it.

Either the gig is IR35 caught or it's not (yes I know it's never that simple) - the criteria about when IR35 should apply has not changed.

Unless you go brolly, the test will still apply as the client will need to instruct the agent to deduct PAYE taxes.

That is not the point I have a reviewed contract that shows I'm outside ir35 and working practices to boot. But if my client gets nervous and boots me under a bus then it's at my cost to dig myself out ad even with insurance you may be looking at the next cluster **** like the EBT scandal.

[perplexed]

That is not the point I have a reviewed contract that shows I'm outside ir35 and working practices to boot. But if my client gets nervous and boots me under a bus then it's at my cost to dig myself out ad even with insurance you may be looking at the next cluster **** like the EBT scandal.

Hmm, given contract outside IR35, working practices sorted then would an answer have been to have got a written "certification" to the working practices from the end client at the start of the contract?

If that's signed off and stated the contract is outside IR35, then even if the client craps themselves and throws you under the bus, surely you could then point out the client had previously deemed you outside. If your working practices hadn't changed and you could show that, you'd that give an appeal against the change of status?