Dagnabit! That twice!
Sorry folks.
- 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.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Reply to: Off Payroll / IR35
Collapse
You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
- You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
- You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
- If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.
Logging in...
Previously on "Off Payroll / IR35"
Collapse
-
Originally posted by northernladuk View PostAnd it's going to be interesting how consultancies that just body shop to clients achieve this. It's long been a discussion point about having 2 sets of criteria to try meet i.e. the engagement with the client and then the engagement with their client.
If a consultancies business model is to supply permies bodies to their client with the profit coming from the difference of pay to charge it's going to be difficult to to argue the contractor is not just filling a hole a permie would. Will take some creative thinking from both parties I would have thought?
It can be done, you have to engage your contractor to deliver a given piece of work, either as a discrete contract or as a schedule to a n overarching contract of engagement (for services, not of service). If, for rough example, the SI's role is to deliver a cloud-based payroll system, your contractor will be responsible for a high level design or a piece of it, the later low level design (or again a piece of it) and a successful implementation (define that how you will but it's not that hard).
Ultimately the line has to be that you are engaging skills, not people. It may mean that most long-running gigs are no longer an option and will be replaced by several smaller ones, or even, in the above example, several parallel HLDs for different clients, but the management overhead will be a lot less than looking after all the complexities of intermediary payrolls and risk management.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by malvolio View PostIn essence, you need to get as close as possible to a true B2B arrangement; only then will you be safely outside IR35.
If a consultancies business model is to supply permies bodies to their client with the profit coming from the difference of pay to charge it's going to be difficult to to argue the contractor is not just filling a hole a permie would. Will take some creative thinking from both parties I would have thought?
Leave a comment:
-
Alll quite correct as of now, but looking forward to 2020 and the private sector changes, the SI may still decide that you are inside IR35 wrt your engagement with them. You are, potentially, not supplying a service to them, merely manpower. So normal due diligence and negotiations on terms are still necessary. In essence, you need to get as close as possible to a true B2B arrangement; only then will you be safely outside IR35.
Leave a comment:
-
The PS client decides whether they need to make a determination. In this case, it sounds like it is 'out of scope' - they are buying a service from the SI, so the responsibility sits with the contractor. (which is different from the PS body deciding IR35 does not apply)
After April 2020, the responsibility will probably sit with the SI.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by cojak View PostToday you are, which is why you should get every contract checked by QDOS or B&C to confirm that it's outside IR35.
It's also up to you to show that you are outside IR35 while in contract.
Leave a comment:
-
The Public Sector (PS) body is responsible, unless the consultancy is providing a service to the PS body, in which case then it is the contractor, but they could be doing stuff to protect their status.
Leave a comment:
-
Today you are, which is why you should get every contract checked by QDOS or B&C to confirm that it's outside IR35.
It's also up to you to show that you are outside IR35 while in contract.
Leave a comment:
-
Off Payroll / IR35
In the following situation, is it clear where responsibility lies?
Ltd Co contractor -> Recruitment Agency -> SI consultancy -> Public Sector client.
Who is responsible for declaring IR35 status of the contract and who is responsible for what deductions if deemed inside?
Appreciate any help.Tags: None
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Unfairly barred from contracting? Petrofac just paid the price Today 09:43
- An IR35 case law look back: contractor must-knows for 2025-26 Yesterday 09:30
- A contractor’s Autumn Budget financial review Dec 17 10:59
- Why limited company working could be back in vogue in 2025 Dec 16 09:45
- Expert Accounting for Contractors: Trusted by thousands Dec 12 14:47
- Finish the song lyric Dec 12 12:05
- A quick read of the taxman’s Spotlight 67 may not be enough Dec 12 09:27
- Contractor MVL Solution from SFP Dec 11 12:53
- Gary Lineker and HMRC broker IR35 settlement on the hush Dec 11 09:10
- IT contractor jobs market sinks to four-year low in November Dec 10 09:30
Leave a comment: