Assessed as Inside from April or a Blanket Ban - it's time to leave

[northernladuk]

Just because they didn't then, doesn't mean they won't now.

It's up to you and you appetite for risk.

Some fruit is undoubtedly hanging lower than other fruit. For me I think it prudent not to be in the lower branches.

Compliancelady who posts on here has indicate some letters or something went out some Public Sector people but I've no evidence of this so skeptical. I think SouWester is right though. It was widely understood the PS roll out was a test bed for the Private Sector so any failed cases could have been a real problem from HMRC. Better to wait till it's fully implemented, using learnings from the Public Sector debacle and then look at chasing people down.

Pure guess work but that's what I'd be considering if I were them.

It could even be a slow burn rather than hit everyone on April the 7th as well. You'd have to have to be daft to think HMRC won't continue to monitor using investigations, just like they did with the old IR35. THey won't implement this and then walk away. So will it be a mass attach of outside to inside or it will it be a tickle of cases over time at the same numbers nowadays? Who knows. Which ever it is, it's not the time to be sitting there all smug thinking they didn't do it before you are safe.

That said plenty of contractors couldn't give a flying fig about IR35 before so I am sure that will continue and I am sure some of them will get away with it and come on here to tell us so.

[SouWester]

IR35 reform started in the public sector in April 2017.

I don't know the figures but I'm assuming that hundreds, if not thousands of contractors who were previously outside IR35 remained with the same agency and end client on an inside IR35 contract through an umbrella company?

What happened to them when they were flagged up on the Agency intermediary report to HMRC?

I don't remember reading of HMRC going after these thousands of pieces of low hanging fruit that have been spoken of on this thread.

I am genuinely asking the question here

In fact, if there are people of that nature on this forum, perhaps they could share their experiences.
Apologies if I have missed anything in the legislation that treated public sector contractors differently.

Just because they didn't then, doesn't mean they won't now. The potential harvest is bigger now.

It's up to you and your assessment of the situation, and appetite for risk.

Some fruit is undoubtedly hanging lower than other fruit. For me I think it prudent not to be in the lower branches.

[eek]

IR35 reform started in the public sector in April 2017.

I don't know the figures but I'm assuming that hundreds, if not thousands of contractors who were previously outside IR35 remained with the same agency and end client on an inside IR35 contract through an umbrella company?

What happened to them when they were flagged up on the Agency intermediary report to HMRC?

I don't remember reading of HMRC going after these thousands of pieces of low hanging fruit that have been spoken of on this thread.

I am genuinely asking the question here

In fact, if there are people of that nature on this forum, perhaps they could share their experiences.
Apologies if I have missed anything in the legislation that treated public sector contractors differently.

HMRC have until April 2021 to start claims - I'm holding judgement until after HMRC's favourite times of Easter and May bank holidays to issue letters

[NO TO RETRO]

Public Sector cases where people stayed on inside IR35

IR35 reform started in the public sector in April 2017.

I don't know the figures but I'm assuming that hundreds, if not thousands of contractors who were previously outside IR35 remained with the same agency and end client on an inside IR35 contract through an umbrella company?

What happened to them when they were flagged up on the Agency intermediary report to HMRC?

I don't remember reading of HMRC going after these thousands of pieces of low hanging fruit that have been spoken of on this thread.

I am genuinely asking the question here

In fact, if there are people of that nature on this forum, perhaps they could share their experiences.
Apologies if I have missed anything in the legislation that treated public sector contractors differently.

[revcrocket]

Depends on what the end client (retailer says) but given the interim CIO is involved it sounds acceptable and achievable just as dodgy as hell.

How is he proposing to get round your agency's handcuff clause?

I am guessing, but because his consultancy doesn't have any contract or dealing with the agency, whereas the handcuff clause is presumably between the end client and the agency so isn't applicable.

[cojak]

If there is a problem, it won't be yours.

I think that I would take that.

[eek]

more than I would have wrote - especially not including agency names

Depends on what the end client (retailer says) but given the interim CIO is involved it sounds acceptable and achievable just as dodgy as hell.

How is he proposing to get round your agency's handcuff clause?

[revcrocket]

I am contracting via an agency at a big company. By and large they have banned the use of PSC's and had the Agency submit notice on all contractors Ltd company's to end in a few weeks, with the option given to leave, go PAYE with the agency or go PAYE with the end client. On the plus side they haven't given anyone a formal inside IR35 determination, just that they no longer will engage Ltd companies. (They have made an exception for a few folk on a project that is due to go live in May and allowed them to continue operating outside IR35)

I had made my decision to leave largely due to reasons already covered within this forum.

This morning a curve ball was thrown where the interim CIO asked for a meeting and said his consultancy, which already provides Project/Programme management resource to my existing end client, would like to take on my Ltd company, but to provide my services to the same end client that I already have. I will obviously get a QDOS check done on the contract when i receive it, but does anyone see a problem with this given its the same end client, albeit whereas a recruitment agency hired my company until now it would now be a consultancy?

The consultancy has existed for a number of years and meets the small business exemption of turnover of £10.2m or less;
£5.1m or less on its balance sheet; or 50 employees or less. (the end client obviously doesn't) which i believe means I can certify myself outside/inside rather than relying on them regardless, please correct me if I am wrong on this, but also does the fact its the same end client potentially cause problems?

And thanks in advance for advice!

[SouWester]

I like it so much I'm going to add a definition.

Zombitractor: a contractor currently working as self-assessed outside, who takes an inside contract post-April with same role/client/agency without assessing the risks of doing so.

This is a pejorative term. Happily, by definition anyone on this forum is unlikely to be a zombitractor so we can use it here without offending each other (peace, bruh). It may be used in these forums to goad or belittle others, if that's your jam (peace off, bruh).

Please contact me for licencing to use this term. Pricing: 5 Euro per 100 uses.

[SouWester]

Anyone currently self-declared as outside is at risk of an HMRC investigation. To summarise this and other threads, given the large number of targets post-April HMRC are most likely to go for low hanging fruit first - the lowest and juiciest is outside>inside same agency.

These are the zombitractors who are all: "what's the big deal I'm just going inside, suck it up crybabies" (I just made that word up, I think).

You are not one of those so you are already ahead of the game. I am moving role specifically to reduce risk of a painful mail-merge investigation.

Lastly, it's all speculation, and what you decide is based on how much rick you are willing to accept.