Reply to: Be careful if you take Outside IR35 contracts

[cojak]

This has now gone off-topic.

Thread closed.

[eek]

Ah we're getting to the crux of this, oh thats not very nice now.
If you like to play mother hen, with 'worldly' advice, that's fine but you see i don't need your advice or help, i can survive without you? Hell, I've even pinned a little notice on my toilet door reminding me which direction to wipe. Sure i come on here and have a little rant but my advice to you is don't take it all too seriously, or, walk on by and keep your judgemental posts to yourself. (alas i feel you just can't help yourself).

Rants are for general - the Professional forums are for dealing with contracting issues and the rules of engagement are that posters should act professionally

i note once again that you still haven’t answered my rather simple question

[JPC]

Well every post you’ve made recently emphasis’ how little you actually understand..

Ah we're getting to the crux of this, oh thats not very nice now.
If you like to play mother hen, with 'worldly' advice, that's fine but you see i don't need your advice or help, i can survive without you? Hell, I've even pinned a little notice on my toilet door reminding me which direction to wipe. Sure i come on here and have a little rant but my advice to you is don't take it all too seriously, or, walk on by and keep your judgemental posts to yourself. (alas i feel you just can't help yourself).

[northernladuk]

How about some of that tax we pay be invested into setting up an official body that actually assesses our position as contractors and grants us a reference we use to claim outside status for that determined contractual period. No of course not as that would be far too straight forward. They want to forever have the opportunity to retrospectively change their mind on any point such is the obsession with 'catching that straggler', let it go.

Wouldn't someone else doing our assessments for fall in to MSC territory?

No instead they sit behind a curtain watching and preying on low hanging fruit. We all know how that million page book of Tax law hot air is interepreted against anyone they see fit, to them QDOS assurance doesn't mean sh't if they smell money. They can't be bothered to setup an approval process themselves and dont recognise or allow any external body either. You couldn't make it up.

Only low hanging fruit are the people that can't be bothered to learn what they do properly.

Most of them must retire to be traffic wardens/paresh councilors refusing planning permissions etc, such is their disdain for anyone actually wanting to earn a decent wage. (The clever ones leave for PWC early in their careers).

Useful. Comments like this kind of destroy any reasonable argument, if there was one here.

[eek]

Who rattled your cage? When you show some respect as opposed to responding with unprovoked insults I'll respond accordingly. Until then take your lack of intellect elsewhere.

Well every post you’ve made recently emphasis’ how little you actually understand..

and it does come down to a single question - because it tells you what you need to do come April if you don’t do the sane thing and move end client in April next year…

and in case you missed it the first time round the all important question is

has your client given you an SDS determination (in which case it’s inside) or simply stated that they won’t work with people using PSC / personal Service Companies (in which case come April you may be able to stay at that client)…

[JPC]

Yet you don’t even seem to know if you are inside IR35 at the moment?

has your client given you an SDS determination (in which case it’s inside) or simply stated that they won’t work with people using PSC / personal Service Companies (which isn’t inside it’s just that you need to use an umbrella company because they don’t trust their staff).

Who rattled your cage? When you show some respect as opposed to responding with unprovoked insults I'll respond accordingly. Until then take your lack of intellect elsewhere.

[northernladuk]

Be absolutely honest with yourself and your position and don't be intimidated by them.

If most inside contractors are honest with themselves they'll have to stay inside. It's the dishonest and incompetant ones (generally) that will be kidding themselves.

[eek]

clueless rant

As discussed previously i am currently inside IR35 only because HMRC influenced my client into doing such for reasons not for discussion. I will flip to being outside if IR35 is repealed..

Yet you don’t even seem to know if you are inside IR35 at the moment?

has your client given you an SDS determination (in which case it’s inside) or simply stated that they won’t work with people using PSC / personal Service Companies (which isn’t inside it’s just that you need to use an umbrella company because they don’t trust their staff).

[JPC]

I find it incredible as always HMRC are allowed to sit back and allow every single Tax payer enough rope to hang themselves its a national disgrace. I called the Tax office recently to be asked 'What Tax code do you want me to apply sir?' . Obviously i was urged to respond with 1,000,000L or similar, numpty. It had also become apparent they had calculated my monthly salary as my yearly salary for the tax year, absolutely useless.

How about some of that tax we pay be invested into setting up an official body that actually assesses our position as contractors and grants us a reference we use to claim outside status for that determined contractual period. No of course not as that would be far too straight forward. They want to forever have the opportunity to retrospectively change their mind on any point such is the obsession with 'catching that straggler', let it go.

No instead they sit behind a curtain watching and preying on low hanging fruit. We all know how that million page book of Tax law hot air is interepreted against anyone they see fit, to them QDOS assurance doesn't mean sh't if they smell money. They can't be bothered to setup an approval process themselves and dont recognise or allow any external body either. You couldn't make it up.

Most of them must retire to be traffic wardens/paresh councilors refusing planning permissions etc, such is their disdain for anyone actually wanting to earn a decent wage. (The clever ones leave for PWC early in their careers).

As discussed previously i am currently inside IR35 only because HMRC influenced my client into doing such for reasons not for discussion. I will flip to being outside if IR35 is repealed. I tick all boxes and some as a consultant outside, and will happily challenge any hmrc officer questioning why i am now outside, they know full well why so don't let that stop you also, just make sure as above you seek proffessional guidance if unsure you are well clear of their goalposts which have a habbit of magically moving on their own. Be absolutely honest with yourself and your position and don't be intimidated by them.

[Fred Bloggs]

And so it begins… Late IR35 status determination

Oh dear.

[cojak]

And so it begins… Late IR35 status determination

[Fred Bloggs]

Hi all,
I chanced upon this thread and was immediately dismayed at this turn of events. Having spent the last few years worrying about the new IR35 legislation I thought I could finally put IR35 behind me. My client has given me an SDS of Outside IR35 and I was so relieved that any fall back now rests with the client / fee-payer.
I didn't even consider that there would be anything to worry about in my new contract. Low and behold I too have an indemnity clause in the contract.
It's my own fault for not having it checked - I used to be quite diligent with this previously but decided that now the client determines IR35 status that I didn't need to worry.
It appears that now I'm in an even worse position than before the legislation changed - still on the hook for a disagreement with HMRC on IR35 status and can't even insure against it.
Has anyone successfully challenged their agency to have this clause removed?
Now I'm aware of this I won't be happy signing future contracts with such a clause however I suspect that it will be a case of 'take it or leave it', or minimise risk and take inside IR35 with an umbrella.
C.

I think you already have the answer, right there.

[Cryton]

Hi all,
I chanced upon this thread and was immediately dismayed at this turn of events. Having spent the last few years worrying about the new IR35 legislation I thought I could finally put IR35 behind me. My client has given me an SDS of Outside IR35 and I was so relieved that any fall back now rests with the client / fee-payer.
I didn't even consider that there would be anything to worry about in my new contract. Low and behold I too have an indemnity clause in the contract.
It's my own fault for not having it checked - I used to be quite diligent with this previously but decided that now the client determines IR35 status that I didn't need to worry.
It appears that now I'm in an even worse position than before the legislation changed - still on the hook for a disagreement with HMRC on IR35 status and can't even insure against it.
Has anyone successfully challenged their agency to have this clause removed?
Now I'm aware of this I won't be happy signing future contracts with such a clause however I suspect that it will be a case of 'take it or leave it', or minimise risk and take inside IR35 with an umbrella.
C.

[Fred Bloggs]

Thinking about it - many years ago Accountants used to recommend closing and restarting your company every x years to avoid IR35 risks.

I'm tempted to suggest it may be worthing doing similar if you sign contracts with clawback / indemnification clauses...

Some people have actually quietly been doing that for UK work for a while now. Take a job, form a company, do the job, dissolve the company.

[Fred Bloggs]

Many thanks, could you possibly expand on "even if they ultimately prove ineffective" please?

If I may take the liberty of answering this? Some of us believe that putting in contract clauses such as quoted above which seek to override the intention of parliament and UK statute cannot be enforced. Some of us here think that in the event of such clauses being tested in court, they will be deemed unenforceable. There are also laws relating to unfair contract terms between companies. Some of us believe such draconian clauses would be deemed unfair and unenforceable. But none of that has been tested in any UK court as far as contractors are concerned.

Though I believe that to be the case, I wouldn't want to be the person testing it in court. I now think at this point in my life, it's very doubtful I will work again. I am therfore one of the half million or so workers missing from the UK workforce. As has been high profile in the media of late.