HMRC announces change to the off-payroll working rules

[heyya99]

Have the government announced when they will announce the findings of their review?

[jamesbrown]

Have the government announced when they will announce the findings of their review?

Well, March 11 is budget day

[heyya99]

Well, March 11 is budget day

I thought I heard mid-February but could be wrong.

[JohntheBike]

Offpayroll.org.uk is my bellwether, it cuts across sectors, skills and rates and shows a clear direction as to where the vast majority of businesses are going. Outside IR35 is dead, at least for the time being and in its current PSC form.

I think the sample size is now enough to see that only a few % wont be forced out of outside IR35 work, extrapolate this out to the remaining clients who have yet to make determination, aware that more than a few of these remaining clients I personally believe have already internally made the decision but are yet to tell the contractors on site as they have yet to agree a contingency plan just in case too many walk.

Yes, the majority of news will be negative, but this is a negative process so I don't personally see this skewing the results.

Some businesses have 3-4 weeks more to plan, and they are certainly not going to use that time to the benefit of the contracting community.

Outside IR35 is dead,

I wouldn't say that. Clearly any organisation which is using any means other than CEST to determine the status of their contractors, must realise the implications for anyone they determine is inside. If they don't, then clearly they might get a very nasty shock.

The 42 question assessment that QDOS is using can clearly judge anyone as outside, provided that the engagement accurately reflects the answers given.

[Jolie]

I wouldn't say that. Clearly any organisation which is using any means other than CEST to determine the status of their contractors, must realise the implications for anyone they determine is inside. If they don't, then clearly they might get a very nasty shock.

I agree, and/or the organisation actually uses the contract to complete CEST properly. There are contractors and organisations who are clearly working together to get outside determinations.

The 42 question assessment that QDOS is using can clearly judge anyone as outside, provided that the engagement accurately reflects the answers given.

Clearly this is where there could be an issue. As the contract is between the PSC and the Pimp and not the client. The answers given by the client clearly don't follow the contract.

For some of the questions there only needs to be evidence in the contract. For others you may need proof it was actually happening in practice, but for the majority who have taken the right steps to get their contract and working practices compliant, there shouldn't be a problem.

[jamesbrown]

I thought I heard mid-February but could be wrong.

No, I think you heard right. That’s when the review will conclude. However, I think the budget is the ultimate confirmation. I wouldn’t expect much in the way of forward guidance unless they are going to suspend implementation altogether (which seems very unlikely). It’s a Mickey Mouse review afterall.

[JohntheBike]

I agree, and/or the organisation actually uses the contract to complete CEST properly. There are contractors and organisations who are clearly working together to get outside determinations.


Clearly this is where there could be an issue. As the contract is between the PSC and the Pimp and not the client. The answers given by the client clearly don't follow the contract.

For some of the questions there only needs to be evidence in the contract. For others you may need proof it was actually happening in practice, but for the majority who have taken the right steps to get their contract and working practices compliant, there shouldn't be a problem.

For some of the questions there only needs to be evidence in the contract. For others you may need proof it was actually happening in practice

agreed, they seem to not want to accept the contractual right of substitution, but don't appear to take the same approach to the contractual statement about MOO. Although some claim that working practises trump contractual provisions, I can't see that either one can be completely ignored and that a judgement should be based on considering both.

[heyya99]

No, I think you heard right. That’s when the review will conclude. However, I think the budget is the ultimate confirmation. I wouldn’t expect much in the way of forward guidance unless they are going to suspend implementation altogether (which seems very unlikely). It’s a Mickey Mouse review afterall.

I think they'll delay it one year so that if it goes belly up, they can absolve themselves of blame.

[jamesbrown]

I think they'll delay it one year so that if it goes belly up, they can absolve themselves of blame.

I think that is roughly as likely as complete abolition in favour of parity of taxation across all types of income, i.e. exceptionally unlikely. If the Lords review is desperately scathing and has an extremely strong recommendation, the probability increases, but I really don’t see it.

[eek]

I think that is roughly as likely as complete abolition in favour of parity of taxation across all types of income, i.e. exceptionally unlikely. If the Lords review is desperately scathing and has an extremely strong recommendation, the probability increases, but I really don’t see it.

+1 - anything beyond complete abolition doesn't resolve the current slow motion train crash - most companies already suffering pain won't delay it just get on with it now.

And I don't think complete abolition would fix things easily, a lot of those blanket bans are here to stay as foreign head offices aren't going to take the risk.