Government review is on website

[WordIsBond]

To save others like me who have been looking for clarify on overseas supply chains with no UK presence - the legislation has been updated so that things continue as they currently are.



Bit of a shame as I was hoping to shunt the risk onto the overseas client (who HMRC would likely never be able to pursue) but at least I know where I stand now and am in control of my determination..

It was always going to end up there, if not now, within a year.

[WordIsBond]

It's a bit of a fop as in this globalised world, what large or medium sized entity does Not have a UK, or at least multi-country, presence?

This has to be close to the stupidest comment you've ever blessed our hearts with.

[WordIsBond]

https://assets.publishing.service.go...e_strategy.pdf is HMRC's published approach



is the important bit - the question is what do they mean by fraud. Criminal behaviour is clear (no-one here would be caught by that requirement) fraud is a far more open question...

The addition of fraud doesn't matter. They can claim to suspect tax evasion which is criminal behaviour. The killer here is not the addition of the word 'fraud' but the use of 'reason to suspect' rather than 'evidence of.'

If you go outside to brolly at the same client, that's not evidence of either criminal behaviour or fraud, but they can certainly claim it is 'reason to suspect.'

[WordIsBond]

BAU for fully overseas supply chains. Shame about that, but it makes sense.

Of course it does. We probably shouldn't have talked about the stupidity of the original approach and just let them get on with it.

Not that it changes anything I'd be doing anyway.

[WordIsBond]

The concern was though that HMRC would use an Inside determination by the client to challenge *any* move from outside to inside regardless of what the contractor had done. This removes that worry and gives us a means to defend ourselves if Fraud is the only criteria they can use.

Hopefully you are right. But "fraud" is NOT the only criterion they can use.

The criterion is "reason to suspect fraud or criminal behaviour." All they have to do is claim they have "reason to suspect" and the investigation opens. Then, even if they don't find fraud or criminal behaviour, they might find something else like, say, non-compliance with the intermediaries legislation. Well, obviously, they opened the investigation because they had reason to suspect. Thankfully, that suspicion was wrong so they don't have to charge you with fraud or criminal behaviour. They are so glad about that, but in the meanwhile, they did notice this, and would you please pay your IR35 taxes?

You may say I'm cynical but I say you are very trusting of an organisation that has repeatedly shown itself to be untrustworthy.

[mallisarealperson]

Bit light don't you think

I had to check the document, as I thought it had not downloaded all of it. 26 pages including 5 for the title/blank/contents.

I bet the document detailing the subsidised food at Westminster is longer.

Only thing I can take from the IR35 mess is that the largest majority Conservative Government since thatcher will loose the next election because of a policy devised by a non elected Labour politician.

I have been a ltd company contractor for 15 years. And now find my sector completely empty. Looking at crap perm jobs.

At least there will be no more long drives and staying away from home. Few months and we can all start picking fruit, now the low skilled workers are banned from the EU

[jamesbrown]

Of course it does. We probably shouldn't have talked about the stupidity of the original approach and just let them get on with it.

Not that it changes anything I'd be doing anyway.

Yeah

Likewise. It’s practically very hard to be inside w/ an overseas client anyway. Would’ve been nice to be irrelevant in principle, but it changes nothing really.

[simes]

This has to be close to the stupidest comment you've ever blessed our hearts with.

It was meant as a bit of a joke - of course, I probably should smothered the post with smilies and other assorted emojis.

If still considered stupid, keep reading as I am sure I can surpass even That.

[northernladuk]

Preparing for the worst, is my mantra.

Like we do when we see your name pop in a reply to a post

It was meant as a bit of a joke - of course, I probably should smothered the post with smilies and other assorted emojis.

If still considered stupid, keep reading as I am sure I can surpass even That.

He did say close to the most stupid.. There are still plenty out there that surpasses it already but we are sure you can.

[ShandyDrinker]

I had to check the document, as I thought it had not downloaded all of it. 26 pages including 5 for the title/blank/contents.

I bet the document detailing the subsidised food at Westminster is longer.

Only thing I can take from the IR35 mess is that the largest majority Conservative Government since thatcher will loose the next election because of a policy devised by a non elected Labour politician.

I have been a ltd company contractor for 15 years. And now find my sector completely empty. Looking at crap perm jobs.

At least there will be no more long drives and staying away from home. Few months and we can all start picking fruit, now the low skilled workers are banned from the EU

I think you are dreaming.

The reality is that no-one gives a toss about a few hundred thousand contractors. They know it and contractors know it hence why they're pressing ahead with it.

What will lose them the next election is if they get someone truly electable in opposition and they don't come up with any completely crackpot policy ideas. There is also the small matter of them delivering for the north, kind of ironic considering it was successive Thatcherite governments which shafted them.

In the grand scheme of things we have to move on. This fight is over. The only thing that is left is giving the government a bloody nose from time to time via class actions against clients. Give how apathetic contractors have been in banding together to fight these changes, the prospect of class actions in the future is very slim indeed.