A blind eye?

[SussexSeagull]

I can well believe a Government Department would put someone outside of IR35 if they deemed them too important to lose (of which a DV contractor certainly might be) but how the HMRC see it is another story.

[mudskipper]

I can well believe a Government Department would put someone outside of IR35 if they deemed them too important to lose (of which a DV contractor certainly might be) but how the HMRC see it is another story.

But that's OK as long as they ensure that the working practices reflect that status.

[mike67]

An accountant friend told her recently that one of his clients had told him that Contractors working at an intelligence agency in south west England were leaving at unprecedented rates/numbers and that to stem the flow HMRC were not enforcing IR35! He went on to say nothing was formalised, (nothing in writing. etc.) I wonder if could this be true, has anyone else heard of this? Or is it nonsense?

When HMRC brought in the new public sector IR35 rules, they said that they would apply to all organisations covered by the Freedom of Information Act. Guess what - intelligence agencies are not covered by the act (for obvious reasons). So yes it is correct, the public sector IR35 rules would not apply to a certain doughnut shaped organisation. Some have speculated (probably correctly) that the reason for using FOI to determine whether or not the rules applied was specifically to allow intel agencies to be exempted.

[Fred Bloggs]

I can well believe a Government Department would put someone outside of IR35 if they deemed them too important to lose (of which a DV contractor certainly might be) but how the HMRC see it is another story.

If I understand correctly, this can only be good for the contractor because the tax debt belongs to the engager under the new rules if a contractor is declared by the engager as outside IR35? Quids in, no need for IPSE or QDOS fees.

[Lance]

If I understand correctly, this can only be good for the contractor because the tax debt belongs to the engager under the new rules if a contractor is declared by the engager as outside IR35? Quids in, no need for IPSE or QDOS fees.

until a new manager comes along and changes the contractor to inside just because.
I'd always keep my insurances current.

[northernladuk]

until a new manager comes along and changes the contractor to inside just because.
I'd always keep my insurances current.

It doesn't generally work like that in the PS. I'd keep my insurance current because I wouldn't expect to be there too long and may need it for previous contracts before the PS one but not for the reason you state there to be fair.