Originally posted by northernladuk
View Post
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
MoD
Collapse
X
-
-
Bit of a turn around from the events at the UKHO (MoD agency) which issued a blanket decree that all contractors were inside and say most of the subsequently leave."Being nice costs nothing and sometimes gets you extra bacon" - Pondlife.Comment
-
I thought UKHO went to BIS at the same time at the Met Office?Originally posted by DaveB View PostBit of a turn around from the events at the UKHO (MoD agency) which issued a blanket decree that all contractors were inside and say most of the subsequently leave.Originally posted by Stevie Wonder BoyI can't see any way to do it can you please advise?
I want my account deleted and all of my information removed, I want to invoke my right to be forgotten.Comment
-
Dont be silly. The ones you might perceive as dead wood are doing what the MoD need out of them. Its the pups that run in and scream Im here to change the world next week that are the problem. Most of the guys that I have seen fail miserably recently have all been really good at their job from a normal point of view but completely unable to cope with the long drawn out time scales of delivering something to a procurement route.Originally posted by northernladuk View PostIf they were REALLY sensible they would now bin their dead wood, drop their rates to somewhere less than normal but just above PAYE and just pick the cream of the crop from the other agencies.
it drives them stupid then they offend people then they leave...Comment
-
Interesting, as the MoD was one of the departments that was fined for non compliance, so you'd expect them to be extra risk adverse.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/s...ctor-publishedComment
-
Why? Being non-compliant and keeping your resources on site is massively cheaper than a tank or fighter jet...Originally posted by teapot418 View PostInteresting, as the MoD was one of the departments that was fined for non compliance, so you'd expect them to be extra risk adverse.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/s...ctor-published
Its almost a no brainer. Im surprised more departments have not figured it out
Comment
-
Interesting and sensible approach maybe. Not sure if thats what HMRC are hoping though.Originally posted by AptoAccounting View PostToday the MoD communicated with its 'off-payroll appointees' regarding IR35 changes for the public sector. Whilst not explicit, the letter seems to imply that a contract review will be enough to satisfy them of employment status. Ideally a HMRC contract review or, alternatively, one from a 'competent person'.
Very different line from the TfL saga.
Is it beyond the public sector to have a coordinated response?
Of course, you'll still get those who dont even bother getting their contract reviewed but if its just a case of getting a QDOS review up front then a lot of people will be safe.Rhyddid i lofnod psychocandy!!!!Comment
-
Just the start I'm guessing
.
What a lovely clusterfeck, as predicted, this is turning out to be.
Really is turning out much better than expected..
The Chunt of Chunts.Comment
-
IR35 letter
I am not quite so sure of the optimism. The letter actually states that one of the evidence criteria is:
A contract review showing that you are outside the IR35 intermediaries legislaton and would not be deemed an employee if you had a contract directly with the MOD rather than through an intermediary. An HMRC Contract Review is preferred, but one from a competent person or organisation is acceptable (eg a tax accountant or advisor in a reputable company). ......
So far so good?....now the sting....
Please note that it is unlikely that we would consider a Contract Review to be be adequate assurance where your placement in the MOD is effectively "manpower substitution" (eg you have been provided under the Ccrown Commercial Service Contract Labour One framworks). Ie through Capita!
The threat is the same as the Hydrographic office.... instant contract termination and HMRC notificaton.Comment
-
Are you sure that it is about the IR35 reform and not just the annual standard off-payroll tax assurance audit?Originally posted by AptoAccounting View PostToday the MoD communicated with its 'off-payroll appointees' regarding IR35 changes for the public sector. Whilst not explicit, the letter seems to imply that a contract review will be enough to satisfy them of employment status. Ideally a HMRC contract review or, alternatively, one from a 'competent person'.
Very different line from the TfL saga.
Is it beyond the public sector to have a coordinated response?Comment
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Andrew Griffith MP says Tories would reform IR35 Oct 7 00:41
- New umbrella company JSL rules: a 2026 guide for contractors Oct 5 22:50
- Top 5 contractor compliance challenges, as 2025-26 nears Oct 3 08:53
- Joint and Several Liability ‘won’t retire HMRC's naughty list’ Oct 2 05:28
- What contractors can take from the Industria Umbrella Ltd case Sep 30 23:05
- Is ‘Open To Work’ on LinkedIn due an IR35 dropdown menu? Sep 30 05:57
- IR35: Control — updated for 2025-26 Sep 28 21:28
- Can a WhatsApp message really be a contract? Sep 25 20:17
- Can a WhatsApp message really be a contract? Sep 25 08:17
- ‘Subdued’ IT contractor jobs market took third tumble in a row in August Sep 25 08:07

Comment