MoD

[AptoAccounting]

Today 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?

[SueEllen]

Yep - as they aren't one entity.

[pjt]

Today 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?

That does sound a bit more promising. By competent person I'm assuming they mean QDOS, IPSE etc? If so then that at least allows a way out for many.

[LondonManc]

Today 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?

Hmmm, would that include a QDOS review already conducted before the start of the engagement? Include working practices and they might actually be conceding that diligent contractors know what they're doing and are behaving like businesses.

[daemon]

That does sound a bit more promising. By competent person I'm assuming they mean QDOS, IPSE etc? If so then that at least allows a way out for many.

Does that imply that the test ISNT mandatory?

I thought it was?

Or does a PS have the ability to say "although the test concludes that this person is inside IR35, we are deeming them outside IR35"?

[northernladuk]

Is it beyond the public sector to have a coordinated response?

You don't understand the PS very well

[pjt]

Does that imply that the test ISNT mandatory?

I thought it was?

My understanding is the test is optional. I know my client has no intention of using it.

[northernladuk]

Hey Apto, I can't pick some of the options on your navigation bar because your chat is at the top left and some big blue balloon comes up obscuring the first two options. HTH.

[malvolio]

Does that imply that the test ISNT mandatory?

I thought it was?

Or does a PS have the ability to say "although the test concludes that this person is inside IR35, we are deeming them outside IR35"?

No, it isn't. The PSB has to make a determination on status: how they do it is up to them, the tool is merely there to assist (yeah, right - assist HMRC most likely...). Sounds like MOD have broken with the habits of a lifetime and made a sensible decision.

[northernladuk]

No, it isn't. The PSB has to make a determination on status: how they do it is up to them, the tool is merely there to assist (yeah, right - assist HMRC most likely...). Sounds like MOD have broken with the habits of a lifetime and made a sensible decision.

If 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.