NHS 'trying not to blink'
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Posts 11 to 20 of 37
  1. #11

    Still gathering requirements...


    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    20
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by malvolio View Post
    I very much doubt it in this case. There is no specific deliverable (i.e. something to be built then delivered to the end client as a fait accompli) and a requirement to work alongside and lead existing staff. May not be a substantive office per se, but it is sufficiently close to a BaU role that it would have to be caught by IR35, even if the hiring organisation is not NHS. It's the end client role that is the determining factor, not any of the intermediary ones.
    An IT director post will not be an officer, will have a high degree of control over how they perform their role, may well have to pay their own expenses e.g. insurance, travel, training and could well have to fix any errors in their own time.

    Putting that into the tool will get you out every time.

  2. #12

    Respect my authoritah!

    NotAllThere's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Far away from HMRC
    Posts
    17,565
    Thanks (Given)
    195
    Thanks (Received)
    817
    Likes (Given)
    1279
    Likes (Received)
    2746

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheFaQQer View Post
    The Times picked up this story and talked about how the locum doctors were going on strike.
    The comments are a laugh. Very little understanding at all. But the usual outrage against tax dodgers.
    --drunk on abuse of power--

  3. #13

    Faqqed Off

    TheFaQQer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    36,212
    Thanks (Given)
    383
    Thanks (Received)
    1296
    Likes (Given)
    3725
    Likes (Received)
    3257

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NotAllThere View Post
    The comments are a laugh. Very little understanding at all. But the usual outrage against tax dodgers.
    I tried to reply to The Times comments but it wouldn't let me for some reason. Less hate on The Maily Telegraph but still only one or two who seem to understand.
    Best Forum Advisor 2014
    Work in the public sector? You can read my FAQ here
    Click here to get 15% off your first year's IPSE membership

  4. #14

    Double Godlike!

    malvolio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Walking in the garden, dreaming of Olivia...
    Posts
    10,372
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    230
    Likes (Given)
    6
    Likes (Received)
    772

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Finance View Post
    An IT director post will not be an officer, will have a high degree of control over how they perform their role, may well have to pay their own expenses e.g. insurance, travel, training and could well have to fix any errors in their own time.
    Not an Officer? You do understand what one of those is, do you? As for expenses, since when does incurring expenses mean you are outside IR35? And what "errors" does a Director make that he has to fix in his own time?
    Putting that into the tool will get you out every time
    Yes it will. Shame you have to provide accurate answers though...and it won't be you providing them.
    Blog? What blog...?

  5. #15

    Still gathering requirements...


    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    20
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by malvolio View Post
    Not an Officer? You do understand what one of those is, do you? As for expenses, since when does incurring expenses mean you are outside IR35? And what "errors" does a Director make that he has to fix in his own time?

    Yes it will. Shame you have to provide accurate answers though...and it won't be you providing them.
    I know exactly what an 'officer' for the purposes of IR35 is. Not everyone whose job title includes 'director' is a Director. One can have any made up job title one likes, it does not make one an Officer. Check the guidance.
    Having business expenses means that you are at risk of not recovering them. Thus financial risk, thus outside.
    An IT director can make lots of errors that would require fixing.....

  6. #16

    Fingers like lightning


    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    823
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    15
    Likes (Given)
    33
    Likes (Received)
    181

    Default

    Do locum Doctors have many other options then the NHS?

  7. #17

    Super poster


    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Midlands
    Posts
    2,037
    Thanks (Given)
    14
    Thanks (Received)
    85
    Likes (Given)
    353
    Likes (Received)
    561

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Finance View Post
    Having business expenses means that you are at risk of not recovering them. Thus financial risk, thus outside.
    Oh....mate, you`re about to get absolutely rinsed.

    Are you trolling?

  8. #18

    Faqqed Off

    TheFaQQer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    36,212
    Thanks (Given)
    383
    Thanks (Received)
    1296
    Likes (Given)
    3725
    Likes (Received)
    3257

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Finance View Post
    Having business expenses means that you are at risk of not recovering them. Thus financial risk, thus outside.


    Which of the three pillars of employment do you think that comes under?

    It might have been part of the BETs in the past, but it's certainly not an indicator of employment or self-employment according to case law and statute.
    Best Forum Advisor 2014
    Work in the public sector? You can read my FAQ here
    Click here to get 15% off your first year's IPSE membership

  9. #19

    Still gathering requirements...


    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    20
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheFaQQer View Post


    Which of the three pillars of employment do you think that comes under?

    It might have been part of the BETs in the past, but it's certainly not an indicator of employment or self-employment according to case law and statute.
    Financial risk has long been established in case law as being inconsistent with employment. It is why the tool (and its predecessor) has the question on expenses. You have seen the tool?

  10. #20

    Double Godlike!

    malvolio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Walking in the garden, dreaming of Olivia...
    Posts
    10,372
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    230
    Likes (Given)
    6
    Likes (Received)
    772

    Default

    Induced financial risk is not the same as business financial risk: you are responsible for creating the former, your client for the latter. You don't have to work at a distance that means it costs lots to get there after all.

    As for Officers, they are positions that, regardless of the occupant, have to exist for the organisation to operate (in private companies, they will be defined in the Articles, in public ones in their charter). Job titles have no relevance. If a non-employee is in an Office, they will effectively have to be paid under IR35 anyway. Hence the prominence of that question in the ESS tool - if you are an Officer then you are caught, end of discussion.
    Blog? What blog...?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.