• 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!

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.

Previously on "Sole Trader status as consultant"

Collapse

  • WordIsBond
    replied
    You're overthinking this.

    She should write to the client saying, "IR35 is intermediaries legislation. I do not work through a limited company or any other intermediary, I am a sole trader, and fully taxed on my income. IR35 does not apply.

    "This is evidenced by my invoices which are not in the name of a limited company."

    That should end it. If they want to take it further, she should say, "It is not in anyone's interest to argue that this is false self-employment. We've entered into this relationship on that understanding to protect you, not me."

    If they end up deciding that she's an employee and should be taxed accordingly then she needs to ask for back holiday pay, etc.

    Leave a comment:


  • dl8860
    replied
    Originally posted by jamesbrown View Post
    Agree, but that does seem like a possible outcome. Basically, the client has likely misunderstood and panicked in light of the proposed changes to IR35. Your best bet is to ensure they understand that IR35 is irrelevant here, but perhaps it has woken them to the existing situation, unrelated to IR35. The problem for them is that, if they decide to move the position on payroll, there’s likely a good argument that employment rights were missing before. So the client is arguably taking a bigger risk by not continuing BAU.
    Yeah all true. I really dislike the existing structure where HMRC makes it seem like anyone who is self-employed and doesn't want employment rights is some sort of exploited person. And if you are happy with the arrangement, you should always be looking over your shoulder for the system to come in and balls up things working perfectly well.

    Leave a comment:


  • jamesbrown
    replied
    Originally posted by dl8860 View Post
    That's a helpful way to look at it, thanks. Just really worried that the client is going to end up seeing this as a risk and either terminate or limit the arrangement in some way. Which would be incredibly annoying.
    Agree, but that does seem like a possible outcome. Basically, the client has likely misunderstood and panicked in light of the proposed changes to IR35. Your best bet is to ensure they understand that IR35 is irrelevant here, but perhaps it has woken them to the existing situation, unrelated to IR35. The problem for them is that, if they decide to move the position on payroll, there’s likely a good argument that employment rights were missing before. So the client is arguably taking a bigger risk by not continuing BAU.

    Leave a comment:


  • dl8860
    replied
    Originally posted by TheCyclingProgrammer View Post
    The reason it’s like this is to stop employers from treating people who would otherwise be employees as self employed to avoid paying employers NIC and providing other employment rights.

    It’s not intended to stop genuine self employed people working for clients, it’s to stop companies from exploiting workers.
    That's a helpful way to look at it, thanks. Just a little worried that the client is going to end up seeing this as a risk and possibly consider terminating or limiting the arrangement in some way.
    Last edited by dl8860; 13 March 2020, 14:39.

    Leave a comment:


  • TheCyclingProgrammer
    replied
    The reason it’s like this is to stop employers from treating people who would otherwise be employees as self employed to avoid paying employers NIC and providing other employment rights.

    It’s not intended to stop genuine self employed people working for clients, it’s to stop companies from exploiting workers.

    Leave a comment:


  • dl8860
    replied
    Originally posted by jamesbrown View Post
    Unless there's an intermediary, the intermediaries legislation doesn't apply. Examples of intermediaries include: companies, partnerships, unincorporated associations and individuals. Even when there is an intermediary, there are minimum conditions of liability. So, no, if there's a direct contract between the client and a sole trader (person=business), the intermediaries legislation doesn't apply. However, the client may be on the hook for employment taxes if it turns out the consultant looks like an employee (same tests in case law), but that is unrelated to IR35.
    Thanks for your answer. What are the employment taxes you mean here? Is that employer's NI?

    So if my wife's status as self-employed fails the non-IR35 IR35 criteria (i.e. is deemed an employee) then she'd be forced by HMRC to go on payroll? If that ends up being the case then the whole system is an utter joke.

    Leave a comment:


  • dl8860
    replied
    Originally posted by Paralytic View Post
    Which is it? An IR35 form, or a questionnaire?

    If an IR35 form, specifically what is it? CEST, an employer specific one. Does it actually mention IR35 or are you making that jump?
    Her main contact at the client company called it an IR35 questionnaire but it doesn't mention IR35 on it. I doubt that contact will know much about the situation. Basically wanting to know if there's any actual risk here of some sort of status determination making anything worse.

    Leave a comment:


  • TheCyclingProgrammer
    replied
    You're right, IR35 does not apply to sole traders. It doesn't need to apply to sole traders as there is no intermediary.

    However, if somebody hires somebody else on a self-employed basis when really that person acts like and is treated like an employee, then HMRC will seek to have that person taxed as if they were an employee. The liability in this case rests with the client or "employer". This is nothing new and is one of the reasons why most agencies won't take on contractors on a self-employed basis and why we all use Ltd companies.

    This is similar in many ways to IR35 post-April except without the intermediary.

    Leave a comment:


  • jamesbrown
    replied
    Unless there's an intermediary, the intermediaries legislation doesn't apply. Examples of intermediaries include: companies, partnerships, unincorporated associations and individuals. Even when there is an intermediary, there are minimum conditions of liability. So, no, if there's a direct contract between the client and a sole trader (person=business), the intermediaries legislation doesn't apply. However, the client may be on the hook for employment taxes if it turns out the consultant looks like an employee (same tests in case law), but that is unrelated to IR35.

    Leave a comment:


  • Paralytic
    replied
    Originally posted by dl8860 View Post
    She's now been asked to fill in an IR35 form by one of her clients,
    Originally posted by dl8860 View Post
    She's literally been handed a questionnaire and asked to fill it out
    Which is it? An IR35 form, or a questionnaire?

    If an IR35 form, specifically what is it? CEST, an employer specific one. Does it actually mention IR35 or are you making that jump?

    Leave a comment:


  • dl8860
    replied
    Originally posted by northernladuk View Post
    What does fill an IR35 form in mean? Her role is being assessed as part of the new rules and she will be given a Status Determination Statement?
    She's literally been handed a questionnaire and asked to fill it out, has questions like "Can the contractor choose where work is undertaken", "Are there any specific deliverables mentioned in the contract" etc.

    I've not heard of an SDS but just researched it now. I had no idea there were going to be any implications from all the IR35 changes happening for sole traders. I ran an LTD myself for a short duration a few years ago so have some background knowledge on it all, but I thought that because as a sole trader she pays tax on a personal basis (i.e. just income tax and NI, no corp tax, dividends etc.) that it wouldn't be affected.

    If she gets put on payroll then I guess the client will need to pay NI and tax at source? I don't see why they'd want to do that though.

    This article mentions the Income Tax (Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003, but is that only when using an agency?

    Leave a comment:


  • northernladuk
    replied
    What does fill an IR35 form in mean? Her role is being assessed as part of the new rules and she will be given a Status Determination Statement?

    Leave a comment:


  • dl8860
    started a topic Sole Trader status as consultant

    Sole Trader status as consultant

    My wife works as a free-lance consultant in the media/marketing industry. She set up as a sole trader as she was advised against LTD route for numerous reasons, and sole trader was easy and simple to set up, and has worked well.

    She's now been asked to fill in an IR35 form by one of her clients, and my first reaction is she doesn't need to as IR35 only covers entities (i.e. LTDs) not sole traders. I'm still happy in that assertion.

    However in finding a few confirmatory sources, I came across these, with some interesting quotes

    Does IR35 apply to sole traders? - Contract Eye

    “The specific legislation only applies to limited companies (and partnerships). However, status is also an issue for sole traders. The main difference is that the end client would foot the bill if they were deemed to be disguised employees, rather than the contractor himself.”
    Are sole traders affected by IR35?

    There are many ways in which a sole trader can be hired by a client. The client organisation will be responsible for paying the additional taxes, interest and possibly penalties should a sole trader be considered to be an employee. Whilst the sole trader does not carry any liability, they would of course suffer a deduction on their future earnings, as the likelihood is that they would have to be placed onto the payroll of the end client.
    In what case would she need to be placed on the payroll? And what additional taxes would be due in this case? She currently pays tax and NI via self-assessment, with nothing deducted at source, as she is very much a self-employed consultant and not an employee.
    Last edited by dl8860; 13 March 2020, 14:38.

Working...
X