I should add that my above comment is not based on any assessment as to whether OP actually should be inside IR35 or not. Despite what some people apparently think, he's given us insufficient evidence to assess that.
I only wish to state that my view is that if HMRC encounters this situation there are significant risks to the client as well as OP, far beyond the ones they are thinking of. It runs the risk of turning a winning IR35 case (if they have a winning case) into a losing one by prejudicing HMRC and the tribunal.
- 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!
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 "Contracting outside IR35 to same client via Independent Service Provider"
Collapse
-
Originally posted by jamesbrown View PostIt seems to me that the risk is primarily for the supply chain above you, including the true end client (which is almost certainly not the ISP) and primarily when an actual investigation takes place, not before. I think the risk to you is comparatively low. But let's be clear, your description alludes to it being a sham arrangement to try and disguise the true end client:
The risk is that the end client is seen to be operating a sham, as you've said. That greatly raises the IR35 risk, in my opinion. It shouldn't, IR35 should be judged on the facts of the engagement, but entering into a sham on determination / liability will prejudice both HMRC and a tribunal on any succeeding IR35 case. The chances of losing such a case become exponentially higher, in my view -- it will be stated, with no really good rejoinder possible, that the only reason for the sham was to avoid IR35 liability.
By agreeing to enter into this sham agreement, OP also runs the significant risk of stirring HMRC hostility which would be bound to lead to historical investigations as well. It increases the risk of losing those investigations for the reasons stated above. It will certainly give HMRC cover to say that they have reason to suspect fraud. And it will, again in my view which may be mistaken, be used to prejudice the tribunal against OP in historical investigations as well.
It will allow HMRC to argue that OP has not been operating a good faith effort to be within the law, and thus OP could even be the first IR35 case in which they try to pierce the corporate veil. And there is a chance they could succeed.
Perhaps I'm paranoid but I see huge risks here.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Disguised Contractor View PostBut the OP, whose case we are discussing, made it clear that he only had one customer, for five years. That sounds awfully close to disguised employment to me.
What about the temps doing high-skill non-BAU work, exploited by their clients? Do they need to be saved, too?
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by northernladuk View PostSays the troll.
I think this whole thread was started by a troll, and I'm not interested in perpetuating it further, so I have nothing more to say. PM me if you feel a need to abuse me some more.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by jamesbrown View PostWhat legitimate business turns down repeat business? Duration has never been a strong indicator, especially if you have multiple clients at once.
Originally posted by jamesbrown View PostIt does make me chuckle how the average contractor has been so cowed by IR35 that they really cannot think like a proper business. It's the temps doing low-skill BAU work, exploited by their clients, that need to be saved from contractordom (not that I blame them either).
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Deepcut View PostWhat a load of rubbish. You must be one of these agile numpties suggest you stick to the 2 weeks sprints and the never ending defects.
Originally posted by Deepcut View PostNow doing my 3rd consecutive Data centre consolidation for a multi national. My projects are highly complex requiring specialist skill sets. Generally 24 month to deliver from start to finish.
Originally posted by Deepcut View PostIf the perms had my skill set they would be out contracting like the rest of us
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Deepcut View PostThere are soon going to be 1000s of contractors that were outside IR35 that are now suddenly inside. Do you not think the half dozen admins they have hired will have their hands full working there way through that backlog before the get to me.
I'll be long retired to my villa in Spain before they even scratch the surface.
Sorry to burst your bubble but with 5 years to chomp on you will be top of the list.
It appears you are just looking for the a seer you want to hear so go for it, you'll be fine.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Disguised Contractor View Post(Is this a troll question? I'm feeling trolled.)
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Drei View PostIf a project is longer than 2 years then you aren't a contractor and should be permanent.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Disguised Contractor View PostYou have been found inside IR35, because you are inside IR35. You should have been made a permanent member of staff a long time ago.
You are exactly the kind of disguised employee that the contracting model was never intended to support, shouldn't have been (unless you have some extenuating circumstances such as extreme travel arrangements), and has now effectively killed a perfectly valid business model for the rest of us who believe ourselves to be effectively in business for ourselves, serving multiple clients a year, taking risk without obligation.
Thank you very much.
(Is this a troll question? I'm feeling trolled.)
Now doing my 3rd consecutive Data centre consolidation for a multi national. My projects are highly complex requiring specialist skill sets. Generally 24 month to deliver from start to finish. If the perms had my skill set they would be out contracting like the rest of us
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Disguised Contractor View PostYou have been found inside IR35, because you are inside IR35. You should have been made a permanent member of staff a long time ago.
You are exactly the kind of disguised employee that the contracting model was never intended to support, shouldn't have been (unless you have some extenuating circumstances such as extreme travel arrangements), and has now effectively killed a perfectly valid business model for the rest of us who believe ourselves to be effectively in business for ourselves, serving multiple clients a year, taking risk without obligation.
Thank you very much.
(Is this a troll question? I'm feeling trolled.)
Agreed, I am pissed off at people like that, I don't like to be tied down so I may have multiple contracts in a year or just one. I also like to take longer time off. I don't usually stick longer than a year because tulip starts to stink and it feels like I am a permanent member of staff. Contractors are an expensive resource brought in to do the stuff that permanents can't do. If a project is longer than 2 years then you aren't a contractor and should be permanent. I don't make tulip loads of money because I like my work life balance, so being a contractor, working when I want for who I want was great. Now I can't because of people like you
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Deepcut View PostHi All,
I have been contracting with the same blue chip client for 5 years, I tend to get offered the high profile projects (the one's they can't afford the perms to tulip).
You are exactly the kind of disguised employee that the contracting model was never intended to support, shouldn't have been (unless you have some extenuating circumstances such as extreme travel arrangements), and has now effectively killed a perfectly valid business model for the rest of us who believe ourselves to be effectively in business for ourselves, serving multiple clients a year, taking risk without obligation.
Thank you very much.
(Is this a troll question? I'm feeling trolled.)
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Deepcut View PostI'll be long retired to my villa in Spain before they even scratch the surface.
Leave a comment:
-
Deemed you inside IR35
Put aside 35% of each years gross income to cover back inside tax and penalty’s
Sent from my iPhone using Contractor UK Forum
Leave a comment:
-
so walk then.
what's the point of this thread if you're so cocksure about it?
Leave a comment:
- 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
- Streamline Your Retirement with iSIPP: A Solution for Contractor Pensions Sep 1 09:13
- Making the most of pension lump sums: overview for contractors Sep 1 08:36
- Umbrella company tribunal cases are opening up; are your wages subject to unlawful deductions, too? Aug 31 08:38
- Contractors, relabelling 'labour' as 'services' to appear 'fully contracted out' won't dupe IR35 inspectors Aug 31 08:30
- How often does HMRC check tax returns? Aug 30 08:27
- Work-life balance as an IT contractor: 5 top tips from a tech recruiter Aug 30 08:20
- Autumn Statement 2023 tipped to prioritise mental health, in a boost for UK workplaces Aug 29 08:33
- Final reminder for contractors to respond to the umbrella consultation (closing today) Aug 29 08:09
- Top 5 most in demand cyber security contract roles Aug 25 08:38
- Changes to the right to request flexible working are incoming, but how will contractors be affected? Aug 24 08:25
Leave a comment: