• 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.
  • FREE workshop: Preparing contractors for Autumn : Weds 29th Sep at 7.15pm. More details here.

Consultancy responsibility for determination

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

    Consultancy responsibility for determination

    Another scenario; if for the first contract, the consultancy's end client is a medium to large company, and the second contract is for the new client which happens to be small, while we do not know if this is the case, would this not also be a scenario to bring about such thinking?

    #2
    Originally posted by simes View Post
    Another scenario; if for the first contract, the consultancy's end client is a medium to large company, and the second contract is for the new client which happens to be small, while we do not know if this is the case, would this not also be a scenario to bring about such thinking?
    How many small companies do you know that would use a consultancy that hires contractors?
    I suspect none at all.

    Although it would be interesting to know of the SDS obligation is passed to the consultancy at that point, rather than the contractor. I suspect that the consultancy would simply determine as inside to reduce their risk of this grey area.
    See You Next Tuesday

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by Lance View Post

      How many small companies do you know that would use a consultancy that hires contractors?
      I suspect none at all.

      Although it would be interesting to know of the SDS obligation is passed to the consultancy at that point, rather than the contractor. I suspect that the consultancy would simply determine as inside to reduce their risk of this grey area.
      You're right, I don't know any at all, so I could not possibly comment on the likelihood of the scenario. I was just wondering if the scenario, in and of itself, would be correct?

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by ladymuck View Post
        It's outside all the way or inside all the way.

        Something needs to materially change in the contract and ways of working for the status to change.

        It sounds like you're a body for the consultancy to drop into different clients? It seems odd that you'd be delivering the same project to multiple clients, some who are hands on (inside) and others who are hands off (outside).

        I'd want way more details before signing anything and indemnities galore over the switch to protect myself from undue attention.
        Disagree. Depends on the scope of work involved.

        We need to do this really closely-controlled thing for 3 months. Then we'll deem you worthy and let you loose on a completely you-driven piece of work, right to substitute introduced, etc.

        Changes to the engagement would need to be sufficient rather just the money train/paper trail.
        The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world that he didn't exist

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by LondonManc View Post

          Disagree. Depends on the scope of work involved.

          We need to do this really closely-controlled thing for 3 months. Then we'll deem you worthy and let you loose on a completely you-driven piece of work, right to substitute introduced, etc.

          Changes to the engagement would need to be sufficient rather just the money train/paper trail.
          Yeah fair enough. I didn't like the sound of the scenario in the OP but I can see that there could be circumstances where the status could change and I would expect new contracts and lots of supporting documentation to go with it.

          Comment


            #6
            Again, my query was (Not my statement, nor an assumption, Reread my first post - It includes the words; "while we do not know if this is the case",)

            COULD a contractor be considered Inside for a Consultancy's end client because they might have banned PSCs, and COULD then for their next client, be considered Outside because;

            a) the new client has done an SDS and found Outside, OR
            b) the new client is a Small company


            Last edited by simes; 21 April 2021, 08:23.

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by simes View Post




              Again, my query was (Not my statement, nor an assumption, Reread my first post - It includes the words; "while we do not know if this is the case",)

              COULD a contractor be considered Inside for a Consultancy's end client because they might have banned PSCs, and COULD then for their next client, be considered Outside because;

              (and I will shake things up for your already, overly consumed, assumptive, abstract-thinking-challenged brain to consider)

              a) the new client has done an SDS and found Outside, OR
              b) the new client is a Small company

              My concern with that argument is the use of the word consultancy rather than agency may (significantly) increase the risk.
              merely at clientco for the entertainment

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by eek View Post

                My concern with that argument is the use of the word consultancy rather than agency may (significantly) increase the risk.
                Well, maybe. Surely.

                But, can I ask, (not a statement, nor an assumption, for the excitable) consultancies are not absolved from such deciding measures? The consultancy's end client is the issue, the decider, which is why in recent times past, we had heard that small consultancies were going out of business because, in order to serve their clients' needs, the consultancies relied on being able to get contractor people in for short projects. Their business model could not sustain having these people permanently employed during down time.

                To clarify my querying stance, is this right?

                Comment


                  #9
                  Occam's razor: consultancy wants to fill the role, sold on the premise the inside determination is short term and the engagement will become outside IR35 (it won't).

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by simes View Post

                    Well, maybe. Surely.

                    But, can I ask, (not a statement, nor an assumption, for the excitable) consultancies are not absolved from such deciding measures? The consultancy's end client is the issue, the decider, which is why in recent times past, we had heard that small consultancies were going out of business because, in order to serve their clients' needs, the consultancies relied on being able to get contractor people in for short projects. Their business model could not sustain having these people permanently employed during down time.

                    To clarify my querying stance, is this right?
                    I've just had direct experience of this through working for a consultancy, and, yes, their (the consultancy) end client was the 'decider', so the role which was Outside before the changes came in, then went Inside, as determined by the end client, based on the new 'off-payroll' rules.
                    Clarity is everything

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X