IR35 in PS gets reported in the media...

[MarkT]

According to the Guardian "agency workers" will lose up to 30% of their "salary" but it looks like this nut job of an idea might be starting to make the news in the mainstream.

Interesting in the article is the statement about the move not gaining traction across the house for private sector changes of a similar ilk..

Oh and the NHS will end up spending twice the amount on the same people...

https://www.theguardian.com/society/...ary-exodus-nhs

[jamesbrown]

Thanks - good find. Interesting comment about the private sector, as you say.

[MrMarkyMark]

Sill peddling the £400m lie I see

The government says it has introduced these changes because it estimates that 90% of these agency workers are not paying enough tax, leading to a loss of £400m a year to the Treasury.

[MarkT]

Thanks - good find. Interesting comment about the private sector, as you say.

Makes me wonder if the initial idea was to push this across all sectors, but once they realised the opposition to that idea, they settled on the Public Sector.

Still quoting the 90% figure I see...

[eek]

Thanks - good find. Interesting comment about the private sector, as you say.

Love the last sentence

He also declined to comment on whether or not the government had done any assessment of the implications for public sector budgets and workforce of these changes.

but yep it's going to be the mess we all know its going to be...

[jamesbrown]

Sill peddling the £400m lie I see

The Gruaniad (among other sources) struggle with their fact-checking and analysis of technical issues. They haven't even assigned the correct assertion (20m) . However, this obviously wasn't Gov't-sourced, as it's spurious crap with a positive spin (ill-conceived policy), rather than a negative spin.

[jamesbrown]

Love the last sentence

Yes, nice to see something that isn't Gov't spun for once, even if the article is just as confused as normal.

[MrMarkyMark]

The Gruaniad (among other sources) struggle with their fact-checking and analysis of technical issues. They haven't even assigned the correct assertion (20m) . However, this obviously wasn't Gov't-sourced, as it's spurious crap with a positive spin (ill-conceived policy), rather than a negative spin.

True.

I remember when the Guardian used to be a paper with a number of good writers, now its just meh.
The Iraq war reporting, for example, was very strong.

I have always read media right across the board, in any case, when I was growing up, well prior to the internet

[jamesbrown]

Makes me wonder if the initial idea was to push this across all sectors, but once they realised the opposition to that idea, they settled on the Public Sector.

Still quoting the 90% figure I see...

Indeed. Quite a surprising comment, and as good as attributed (i.e. probably Gauke or Ellison), not that Maugham is a massive fan of this Gov't. I suppose, ultimately, the same approach was killed in 1999, so there might be some pushback, and perhaps now isn't the time to be smegging with the private sector unnecessarily. Until I read that comment, I thought it was almost inevitably going to be extended in, say, April 2018....

[MPwannadecentincome]

Are doctors and nurses a good example, surely most of them are inside IR35 anyway?