Public sector contracting

[BolshieBastard]

Look out folks they are trying to get the final draft out and enforced by next week

I wouldnt get your hopes up if this article is anything to go by here

True, its an appalling article with the authors seemingly not knowing the difference between civil servants and contractors working on a government contract but, it also states some departments being risk averse are looking to apply the tax \ NI 'rules' to anyone earning under £220 a day and less than 6 months (pretty much as I said they would).

[swamp]

I wouldnt get your hopes up if this article is anything to go by here

True, its an appalling article with the authors seemingly not knowing the difference between civil servants and contractors working on a government contract but, it also states some departments being risk averse are looking to apply the tax \ NI 'rules' to anyone earning under £220 a day and less than 6 months (pretty much as I said they would).

Really bad article, and predictably there is very little support in the public comments for these high-earning 'civil servants' (a.k.a. contractors). The mongs posting there need to know that the alternative is £2000 a day consultants from the big body shops or indians. Either way the civil service will end up in pieces.

[centurian]

A PCG spokesman said that many freelancers working for Government departments were so irritated by the demand that they were threatening to stop working in the public sector altogether.

If someone from the PCG used those exact words to a journalist, they should be fired. Talk about antagonising the natives

However, that part wasn't in quotes, so it's likely the journalist paraphrased, or simply made that part up. Just goes to show that the PR battle cuts down ways.

[malvolio]

If someone from the PCG used those exact words to a journalist, they should be fired. Talk about antagonising the natives

However, that part wasn't in quotes, so it's likely the journalist paraphrased, or simply made that part up. Just goes to show that the PR battle cuts down ways.

AIUI this was not a PCG press release. The journo was working off something pulled from a news consolidation website that in turn seems to have picked up some bits from the PCG website. As you can tell, most of it is hopelessly inaccurate and badly informed; apart from aything else, these are contractors, not civill servants. Doubt we'll se a correction though; one of the problems here is that Joe Public has been educated to see anything other than paying full PAYE and NICs on any kind oof income as being hoplessly immoral.

Worth noting a story elsewhere that IBM paid 7% CT last year on its UK earnings. They also trotted out the usual "we fuilly adhere to all UK tax legislation" line...

[swamp]

Who the f... are Exaro, and why are they pushing this?

Civil servants complain about crackdown on
Our people | exaronews.com

There is no link between the interests of shareholders and Exaro's editorial stance. Our editorial team is free of any business or commercial agenda.

And who is the author of the above, David Hencke?!

David Hencke | exaronews.com



PIECES BY David Hencke
Civil servants complain about crackdown on ‘off payroll’ work | 695 words
A4e loses bid to win major new contract from Home Office | 598 words
Profit-making company poised to run university in first for UK | 664 words
Tender document details how company will run university | 657 words
Auditors highlight rising concerns over government spending | 701 words
NAO warns government bodies about extra staff payments | 709 words
Academies found with senior staff on ‘off payroll’ contracts | 528 words
Auditors condemn funding body for England’s academies | 665 words
Companies with public contracts face pressure over ‘openness’ | 694 words
Agency boss exposed by Exaro defends activities to Leveson | 985 words
One in three BBC presenters works through service companies | 717 words
Treasury admits ‘catalogue of errors’ over Ed Lester’s deal | 556 words
Leveson inquiry summons agency boss exposed by Exaro | 623 words
MPs summon BBC and council chiefs over ‘off payroll’ deals | 777 words
Public officials still offered thousands of pounds for scoops | 659 words
Agency boss denies paying any bribes for information | 654 words
Background: police arrest 39 so far in ‘bribery’ probe | 549 words
NHS Direct loses bids to run new ‘111’ helpline contracts | 692 words
Ed Lester to resign as head of Student Loans Company | 569 words
Auditors questioned wide array of A4e work placements | 789 words
Fraud claims plague troubled A4e in police probe | 645 words
Revealed: Exaro publishes A4e internal audit report in full | 180 words
Leaked audit report exposes ‘potential fraud’ at A4e | 725 words
A4e sent unemployed job-seeker to work in lap-dance club | 618 words
Civil servant was paid ‘off payroll’ for more than 10 years | 699 words
Found: 2,000 civil servants working ‘off payroll’ | 826 words
Danny Alexander’s letter to George Osborne | 85 words
Home Office lines up A4e for major new contract | 781 words
Whitehall review of civil servants’ contracts delayed | 563 words
MP challenges ministers over Whitehall tax row | 711 words
BBC pays 3,000 people via personal companies | 703 words
Lester to close personal company following tax row | 482 words
Hodge: Whitehall is trying to dismantle watchdog | 756 words
Letters detailing ‘Whitehall war with MPs’ revealed | 395 words
Revealed: Whitehall declares war on Parliament | 831 words
E-mails add to pressure over Whitehall tax deals | 694 words
SLC e-mail asked: is risk worth running on Lester deal? | 695 words
Lester deal agreed despite being SLC accounting officer | 458 words
KPMG initially told SLC: deduct tax from Lester’s pay | 592 words
Top nuclear regulator fired for being paid ‘off payroll’ | 909 words
Whitehall widens inquiry into civil servants’ contracts | 747 words
Former cabinet secretary: ‘content’ with SLC tax deal | 492 words
Revealed: why O’Donnell approved tax arrangements | 706 words
MPs challenge ministers over top official’s tax deal | 502 words
Revealed: special tax deal approved for senior official | 742 words
Alexander and Willetts ‘agreed contract for SLC chief’ | 701 words
‘Tax efficient’ arrangements for loans boss uncovered | 714 words
How ‘consultant’ civil servants can reduce tax burden | 841 words
SLC agreed payment route after hasty appointment | 696 words
‘Tax deal is personal,’ but Alexander orders inquiry | 674 words
Hunt plans to replace PCC with new Press regulator | 699 words
Online publications face regulation under Hunt proposals | 461 words
Hunt talks to Exaro about his vision for ‘new PCC’ | 800 words
New MPs ‘might regret’ not going to seminars on code | 564 words
Auditors force Treasury to re-think debt assessment | 831 words
Audit Commission auditors help bids for contracts | 723 words
Agency names approved bidders for auditing work | 429 words
Auditors attack Osborne’s new UK debt assessment | 722 words
Lawson condemns markets for being ‘superficial’ | 566 words
Europe ‘must dismantle euro in orderly way,’ says Lawson | 595 words
Named: the public bodies set to escape audit | 554 words
Public bodies with £1m-plus budgets to be spared audit | 553 words
BBC wins battle to block ‘unfettered access’ for auditors | 722 words
Dear minister: how Hunt helped BBC neuter auditors | 881 words
Auditors question £13bn of government spending | 412 words
Auditors cast doubt on MoD equipment worth £5.3bn | 432 words
Defra audit reveals £175m ‘fines’ to EU over subsidies | 532 words
Auditors qualify DWP accounts for 23rd time over errors | 431 words
Tax credits of up to £2.7bn ‘paid wrongly’ by HMRC | 416 words
BBC delays auditors’ examination of ‘efficiency drive’ | 864 words
Pickles plans no audit for £2bn of public spending | 480 words
Nearly 10,000 public bodies set to escape audit | 400 words
Councils to be asked to adopt business-style audit | 756 words
Audit reforms threaten higher costs to councils | 345 words
Public set to lose right to call for spending investigation | 339 words
Auditing shake-up ‘set to cost £120m,’ say MPs | 448 words

[bobspud]

I don't think irritated with the behaviour and considering never touching the public sector again is inflammatory. I think its an understatement.

In the end departments are overdoing the implementation of the requirement to simply ask a question, or get an accountants letter stating that upon the acceptance of the role, the contract between the Agent and Contractor was examined by a legal professional and considered inside or outside the scope of IR35 and that the contractor as obeyed the spirit of the contract in their working arrangements and tax has been apportioned appropriately as the result...

Instead When I spoke to Capita last week the girl I was dealing with said that Capita have given over their contracts to let the treasury amend them as they see fit...

[BolshieBastard]

I don't think irritated with the behaviour and considering never touching the public sector again is inflammatory. I think its an understatement.

In the end departments are overdoing the implementation of the requirement to simply ask a question, or get an accountants letter stating that upon the acceptance of the role, the contract between the Agent and Contractor was examined by a legal professional and considered inside or outside the scope of IR35 and that the contractor as obeyed the spirit of the contract in their working arrangements and tax has been apportioned appropriately as the result...

Instead When I spoke to Capita last week the girl I was dealing with said that Capita have given over their contracts to let the treasury amend them as they see fit...

But with respect, I just cant get my head around the fact that yourself and some others thought this attack by Government on contractors (because that's what this is, the first (next?) stage in an effort to eradicate PSC's for one man bands), was not going to affect you because your contract would be fully outside IR35 or that Department's would ignore it for one reason or another.

I'll say it again, this is going to be the thin end of yet another wedge to stop contractors working through PSC's and pay full PAYE & NI. The public sector is nearly always the first place governments implement such things since they hold the purse strings.

Once they have what they want in place, the next step is the private sector. Yes, they'd need to change or implement a law but the argument will go 'this is very effective in the public sector and, the private sector is now out of step. We need to bring the private sector into line with this view of taxation.'

[MyUserName]

• The governement wants more money in a rush.
• We have money.
• Some public figures have given them a stick to beat us with.
• The public hate us and no one will support us.
• The government just have to blacken a few grey areas, perhaps slaughter one or two people in court as an example and they can snatch a load of money and get a big PR win.

The public sector is first as that is where the government has most control and can easily set a precedant.

Does anyone really expect this not to follow through into the private sector and hammer 95% of contractors whether it technically should or not?

[bobspud]

But with respect, I just cant get my head around the fact that yourself and some others thought this attack by Government on contractors (because that's what this is, the first (next?) stage in an effort to eradicate PSC's for one man bands), was not going to affect you because your contract would be fully outside IR35 or that Department's would ignore it for one reason or another.

I'll say it again, this is going to be the thin end of yet another wedge to stop contractors working through PSC's and pay full PAYE & NI. The public sector is nearly always the first place governments implement such things since they hold the purse strings.

Once they have what they want in place, the next step is the private sector. Yes, they'd need to change or implement a law but the argument will go 'this is very effective in the public sector and, the private sector is now out of step. We need to bring the private sector into line with this view of taxation.'

Because the guidance was to make all contractors "provide assurances (LIKE IBM) that the right tax was applied to the engagement" So if your contract is written as a good framework to work outside IR35 then you would be acting in the spirit of the matter. However through a mix of incompetence and malice that is not how most of the departments have reacted...

I am outside IR35 fact. No question on the matter, I am sat in my own office (I base myself here most days), working to my own rules on my own kit with no single person within the client overseeing deliverables. I am telling them how to do what they have no knowledge of. A simple and enviable position.
I am not a typical contractor for my client and in fact might be the only guy on the site that understands what using your contract as the basis for how you work means....

However having heard that HMRC are in a very destructive mood over this matter even having a cast iron concreate status is not enough because some arse from hector can spend the next two years victimising you just for fun...

[centurian]

I don't think irritated with the behaviour and considering never touching the public sector again is inflammatory.

It may not be inflammatory to you, but it is highly inflammatory to a large percentage of the voting public, who are the ones the politicians are listening to.