How work out the equivalent rate for inside IR35?

[lucyclarityumbrella]

I think Lucy means that HMRC are going with the "they've jumped, that looks guilty" approach, rather than considering that it's tantamount to a 50% rate cut for those with reasonable travel expenses to move from outside to inside IR35.

It would be insane to think that they would consider the latter, surely!

[LondonManc]

It would be insane to think that they would consider the latter, surely!

In all seriousness, is it the "looks guilty" line that they're taking?
Given the role was always deemed outside, surely those that are leaving are probably the ones that are covering their backsides far better?

[MrMarkyMark]

I think Lucy means that HMRC are going with the "they've jumped, that looks guilty" approach, rather than considering that it's tantamount to a 50% rate cut for those with reasonable travel expenses to move from outside to inside IR35.

Was wondering how they would tie the data sets together?

Anyway, should be a completely moot point as every contract is assessed differently with regards to IR35.

This sounds like some kind of HMRC wet dream rather than anything tangible, probably written as some wish list item by some 25 year old policy maker.

[lucyclarityumbrella]

In all seriousness, is it the "looks guilty" line that they're taking?
Given the role was always deemed outside, surely those that are leaving are probably the ones that are covering their backsides far better?

I think their take is that if you have always worked in the PS, and now are switching because of the changes to IR35, that the reason they are changing is to "avoid tax" and that you would always have been caught - just my interpretation though.

The actual text reads as follows: "If it appears they are choosing to go and work in the private sector to simply maintain "outside of IR35 status" you (the PS Body) should consider informing HMRC, who might take action to investigate the contractor's tax affairs further if they are seen as high risk."

[MrMarkyMark]

I think their take is that if you have always worked in the PS, and now are switching because of the changes to IR35, that the reason they are changing is to "avoid tax" and that you would always have been caught - just my interpretation though.

The actual text reads as follows: "If it appears they are choosing to go and work in the private sector to simply maintain "outside of IR35 status" you (the PS Body) should consider informing HMRC, who might take action to investigate the contractor's tax affairs further if they are seen as high risk."

The PS body have got to turn Queens about something they didn't cause in the first place
...

[LondonManc]

I think their take is that if you have always worked in the PS, and now are switching because of the changes to IR35, that the reason they are changing is to "avoid tax" and that you would always have been caught - just my interpretation though.

The actual text reads as follows: "If it appears they are choosing to go and work in the private sector to simply maintain "outside of IR35 status" you (the PS Body) should consider informing HMRC, who might take action to investigate the contractor's tax affairs further if they are seen as high risk."

Rather than considering that they're doing so to actually be able to keep a reasonable standard of living - i.e. working outside if there's significant travel involved.

Where do they get these people from?

[eek]

Was wondering how they would tie the data sets together?

Anyway, should be a completely moot point as every contract is assessed differently with regards to IR35.

This sounds like some kind of HMRC wet dream rather than anything tangible, probably written as some wish list item by some 25 year old policy maker.

Agency reporting regulations give you NI number which would be enough to do something with...

However they would not be able to identify who left a public sector contract and who left a private sector contract.

This is about revenge and its actually pointless. I'm happy for HMRC to do it as it would waste their time fighting cases with a decent defence but its not a good use of their time...

[LondonManc]

Agency reporting regulations give you NI number which would be enough to do something with...

However they would not be able to identify who left a public sector contract and who left a private sector contract.

This is about revenge and its actually pointless. I'm happy for HMRC to do it as it would waste their time fighting cases with a decent defence but its not a good use of their time...

Quite sad indeed that they're going after the ones who won't play by their rules and simply roll over to suit their numbers.

[MrMarkyMark]

Agency reporting regulations give you NI number which would be enough to do something with...

However they would not be able to identify who left a public sector contract and who left a private sector contract.

This is about revenge and its actually pointless. I'm happy for HMRC to do it as it would waste their time fighting cases with a decent defence but its not a good use of their time...

This

[eek]

Quite sad indeed that they're going after the ones who won't play by their rules and simply roll over to suit their numbers.

I suspect they won't be that stupid - but you can see the revenge desire given the rumoured impact on "Making Tax Digital" and other projects (even the ESS tool)...