• 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!

New CEST

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • woboogie
    replied
    Originally posted by simes View Post
    Quite possibly.

    Without having delved into this more deeply just yet, already (I use the word advisedly and with not a little humour) it is looking a lot fairer.

    Maybe now, if clients are asked to use this tool, and so long as they don't game-play it to secure an Inside verdict thereby assuring a risk free and, with the HMRC, communication free existence, we might already be on a surer footing.

    A bold and premature statement??

    And now, for the dissenters to that theory, let the games commence...
    From the couple of goes i had at it, i tend to agree. If you can substitute, I assume its no longer seen as a PSC type contract.

    Leave a comment:


  • simes
    replied
    Originally posted by ladymuck View Post
    It is possible to get outside with a vetoed sub. I think things like having to buy stuff before you get reimbursed weigh highly.
    Quite possibly.

    Without having delved into this more deeply just yet, already (I use the word advisedly and with not a little humour) it is looking a lot fairer.

    Maybe now, if clients are asked to use this tool, and so long as they don't game-play it to secure an Inside verdict thereby assuring a risk free and, with the HMRC, communication free existence, we might already be on a surer footing.

    A bold and premature statement??

    And now, for the dissenters to that theory, let the games commence...

    Leave a comment:


  • BoredBloke
    replied
    Originally posted by ladymuck View Post
    It is possible to get outside with a vetoed sub. I think things like having to buy stuff before you get reimbursed weigh highly.
    Bugs me that buying kit and the like is excluded - I've a server, 2 desktops, one at home and one where I stay while working away, a laptop and an old 'spare' that is still refusing to die after almost 10 years! All of them need software and are kept up to date, so I'm signed up to the Action pack and have been for years. Yes these costs are not taken into account as part of the assessment.

    Leave a comment:


  • ladymuck
    replied
    Originally posted by simes View Post
    I've just tried it saying the client could reject a sub, still came out fine (Outside) with all else properly answered...
    It is possible to get outside with a vetoed sub. I think things like having to buy stuff before you get reimbursed weigh highly.

    Leave a comment:


  • simes
    replied
    I've just tried it saying the client could reject a sub, still came out fine (Outside) with all else properly answered...

    Leave a comment:


  • woboogie
    replied
    Substitution seems to be the silver bullet. So if you are a PSC with no cover, you look knackered.

    Leave a comment:


  • SteelyDan
    replied
    Interestingly a previous pub sec outside role, & checked by QDOS, has returned an inside result.

    Leave a comment:


  • TwoWolves
    replied
    Originally posted by eek View Post
    Look at it from the other direction - a lot of contractors are replacement for permanent staff. And someone who is continually renewed and accepts such renewals does look very similar to a permanent member of staff.

    On one side it's penalising repeat business on the other side the purpose of these IR35 changes is to discourage firms from using limited company contractors as a replacement for permanent staff.
    Large complex IT projects take about 3 (up to 5) years to deliver on average*. If companies used permies exclusively and planned to sack most of them after delivery the severance bill would be quite crippling.

    * Excluding public sector never-ending-stories.

    Leave a comment:


  • ladymuck
    replied
    I have repeat business but often with a good few years in-between contracts. It's would be disappointing to be tarred with the same brush as someone on a perpetual rolling 6 month contract

    Leave a comment:


  • simonsmith
    replied
    The data that the form runs from can be found here - off-payroll-decision/conf/tables/2.4 at master . hmrc/off-payroll-decision . GitHub

    Looking at this one as an example, it seems as though the `HIGH` values in result are mapping to it being inside

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X