What's changed - FAQ

[KC1]

A two second Google search (Sellafield freedom information) brings up Freedom of Information | Sellafield Ltd so yes they are included.

Yes I found this too. I didn't think a private limited company could be classed as PS. What I'm unclear about is how could a private company be covered under the FOI Act?

Surely the new legislation needs to be clear that the criteria is not being PS (which is the majority of the case), but the true measure is whether the organisation is under the FOI Act. Also it seems unreal that the reliance is on searching Google for the answer and not based on a definitive list from HMRC?

Apologies if this is a stupid or obvious question but why does the new legislation only affect PS for now?

[SueEllen]

Yes I found this too. I didn't think a private limited company could be classed as PS. What I'm unclear about is how could a private company be covered under the FOI Act?

Surely the new legislation needs to be clear that the criteria is not being PS (which is the majority of the case), but the true measure is whether the organisation is under the FOI Act. Also it seems unreal that the reliance is on searching Google for the answer and not based on a definitive list from HMRC?

Apologies if this is a stupid or obvious question but why does the new legislation only affect PS for now?

Can you explain why you think HMRC would give you a black and white answer when they haven't previously with IR35 and other tax issues?

The private sector can easily take steps to avoid this as their only duty is to make money for their shareholders.

[KC1]

Can you explain why you think HMRC would give you a black and white answer when they haven't previously with IR35 and other tax issues?

Maybe I'm just naive and expected clarity. I agree IR35 is complicated but the principle of it is simple and it is to prove disguised employment. The interpretation of various aspects is open to discussion and this is where cases are won or lost. However with this new legislation there is just no logic other than to increase tax revenue. There is no case to fight for. IR35 just seems to be used as the excuse to enforce the rules. Guilty before proven innocent.

The private sector can easily take steps to avoid this as their only duty is to make money for their shareholders.

The new legislation is around IR35 (effectively disguised employment) within the PS. I guess there is still a lack of detail from the government/HMRC, and we are still waiting for this status tool to be released. However is this tool going to change the position as it is now? From what I've read it is blanket coverage that every PCS providing contracting services to the PS (or covered by the FOI Act) are automatically in scope of IR35, and classed as off payroll working, without a case to fight whether it is disguised employment or not.

I still don't understand why only PS, other than the government has a greater interest in it as it's 'their' money being spent on PCS services. However the whole objective is to maximise taxation, so therefore why not applied in general to everything (public and private), just like IR35 could be?

[northernladuk]

There is a definitive list. I posted the link in one of the threads awhile ago.

I can't find it but this is an interesting one.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/natio...ificationguide

I'm on my phone so can't browse it properly but looks useful?

[eek]

I still don't understand why only PS, other than the government has a greater interest in it as it's 'their' money being spent on PCS services. However the whole objective is to maximise taxation, so therefore why not applied in general to everything (public and private), just like IR35 could be?

Because it is only in the public sector that HMRC have the additional leverage of being able to fire the management if it doesn't adopt the correct approach (as HMG / HMRC see it). It also means that it can be tested early and any snags resolved before rolling it out to the private sector where companies are likely to fight harder against it/

It's also the fact that this has been planned for years to be slowly implemented. Starting with the Agency Reporting Regulations you then have no expenses for umbrella companies and those using a limited company inside IR35 - next this....

[Fred Bloggs]

Because it is only in the public sector that HMRC have the additional leverage of being able to fire the management if it doesn't adopt the correct approach (as HMG / HMRC see it). It also means that it can be tested early and any snags resolved before rolling it out to the private sector where companies are likely to fight harder against it/

It's also the fact that this has been planned for years to be slowly implemented. Starting with the Agency Reporting Regulations you then have no expenses for umbrella companies and those using a limited company inside IR35 - next this....

And even then, certain people were so busy navel gazing, they never saw it coming.

[eek]

And even then, certain people were so busy navel gazing, they never saw it coming.

I'm not going there again....

[LondonManc]

I'm not going there again....

Please do, it's rivalling your Passat rental story for most tedious anecdote.

[eek]

Please do, it's rivalling your Passat rental story for most tedious anecdote.

I only bring that up when people are looking for lease cars - to show its FAR better to go for what the manufacturer wants to lease that week rather than what you want...

[northernladuk]

I only bring that up when people are looking for lease cars - to show its FAR better to go for what the manufacturer wants to lease that week rather than what you want...

You've got a lease car? What is it? Get a good deal or something?