Reply to: New Clause in a contract that I have never seen before

[BolshieBastard]

I have now had a response out of Capita and the omens appear ominous.

I had asked for clarification of the clause and to understand how far tax avoidance scheme reaches.

They have stated that they will not remove the clause. as it is there to protect them from contractors using offshore schemes (yawn) I, in turn have told the agent that I will be taking representation to review the contract in the whole, and that I have other offers on the table...

Capita are stating that this is to protect them from offshore tax schemes and money laundering. However I am very nervous of holding a contract that basically states that I will be held liable for paying myself as an employee, while stating that I am not one for the purpose of employment rights and protections, and that they will terminiate the contract as soon as HMRC come sniffing about.

Sad as usual its the client that will lose out in this...

Doesnt surprise me they wont change. They want to protect themselves with the client first and foremost. At the end of the day, they'll rather you walk and some other mug will sign it and adhere to it.

What do you think might happen if you sign?

Being pragmatic, you can say nothing or, you could say 'well I expect agencies to adhere to the T&C's so why should I be different myself?'

Seriously, if you are suggesting signing and ignoring it because you dont like \ agree with it, I think we are on dodgey ground. But each to their own.

My position is to act professionally even with something I disagree with. So, my response, as I have mentioned before, is to get the clause removed or walk away. I'd never advocate signing a contract then, just disregard the bits of it I disagree with or dont like.

[v5srv]

Recognised that as Capita as soon as I saw it - same clause in mine from last year. Had it reviewed by QDOS. Passed without any comment.

[moira under the stairs]

You asked so I explained. It isn't about green eyed monster at all. That is just ridiculous. It is nothing to do with the over complexity, they went out of their way to follow a more complex route to avoid it. Anyway, this is off topic. Go discuss it in the correct threads if you feel that strongly.

http://forums.contractoruk.com/gener...avoidance.html

http://forums.contractoruk.com/gener...judgement.html

is it !!!

[northernladuk]

Drama queen .. we are not talking about murder... This is all about the green eyed monster someone getting something that others are not , we could go through a long list of Celebs, MP's and high profile people who are all using some kind of way to pay less tax is that right thing to do ? its the over complicated uncertainty of the UK Tax system that is at fault here not morality... wake up its not something new

You asked so I explained. It isn't about green eyed monster at all. That is just ridiculous. It is nothing to do with the over complexity, they went out of their way to follow a more complex route to avoid it. Anyway, this is off topic. Go discuss it in the correct threads if you feel that strongly.

http://forums.contractoruk.com/gener...avoidance.html

http://forums.contractoruk.com/gener...judgement.html

[moira under the stairs]

If you were right the issue wouldn't have blown up all over the papers. For every law there is a loophole. The spirit of the law is there to do the right thing. The fact someone has found a work around doesn't not mean it is right. It is legal for the time being but it may not be right. It is just an ongoing game of catchup, amend a law for the right reasons, someone creats a work around, change the law and so on.

If I found a way around the law to murder someone and not get prosecuted would it be right to do it?

Drama queen .. we are not talking about murder... This is all about the green eyed monster someone getting something that others are not , we could go through a long list of Celebs, MP's and high profile people who are all using some kind of way to pay less tax is that right thing to do ? its the over complicated uncertainty of the UK Tax system that is at fault here not morality... wake up its not something new

[northernladuk]

Tax is about the Law not Morals... is it morally correct for the Government to spunk away money ?

If you were right the issue wouldn't have blown up all over the papers. For every law there is a loophole. The spirit of the law is there to do the right thing. The fact someone has found a work around doesn't not mean it is right. It is legal for the time being but it may not be right. It is just an ongoing game of catchup, amend a law for the right reasons, someone creats a work around, change the law and so on.

If I found a way around the law to murder someone and not get prosecuted would it be right to do it?

[moira under the stairs]

I am sure if you have read the news you can work it out. The situation has been clearly explained in any one of a 1000 reports on the situation. It is a morally wrong situation rather than a legal one but surely you can work it out?

Tax is about the Law not Morals... is it morally correct for the Government to spunk away money ?

[northernladuk]

Is anyone able to explain what Jimmy Carr has done wrong ?

I am sure if you have read the news you can work it out. The situation has been clearly explained in any one of a 1000 reports on the situation. It is a morally wrong situation rather than a legal one but surely you can work it out?

[moira under the stairs]

The perceived wisdom I have had, talking to a few people today is that: The clause is what it says on the tin. A clause to stop you being a knob and pulling a Jimmy Carr. For the record I am in total agreement with that point.

The contract from an IR35 perspective is a good framework to work as a freelancer not a controlled employee so with a few caveats, I will probably sign quite happily...

Is anyone able to explain what Jimmy Carr has done wrong ?

[bobspud]

Thanks for clarifying that it's public - sounds like I'm about to get the same clause on renewal so I've put out some feelers for another role. I'd be interested to know the IR35 review outcome - my review of my current contract (assuming we're on something similar which I suspect we are given that it's Capita and Public Service) is that it's pretty good IR35 wise. This new clause however gives me serious cause for concern.

Cheers

B

The perceived wisdom I have had, talking to a few people today is that: The clause is what it says on the tin. A clause to stop you being a knob and pulling a Jimmy Carr. For the record I am in total agreement with that point.

The contract from an IR35 perspective is a good framework to work as a freelancer not a controlled employee so with a few caveats, I will probably sign quite happily...

[bracken]

I will be continuing on the road and see what the IR35 review returns.

Thanks for clarifying that it's public - sounds like I'm about to get the same clause on renewal so I've put out some feelers for another role. I'd be interested to know the IR35 review outcome - my review of my current contract (assuming we're on something similar which I suspect we are given that it's Capita and Public Service) is that it's pretty good IR35 wise. This new clause however gives me serious cause for concern.

Cheers

B

[bobspud]

And are you willing to walk away? Would rather have a couple of months at a client and in the negligble chance it might happen walk rather than sit on the bench IMO.

If you are not in one whats the problem? You got more chance of project being binned, getting walked for shagging boss's wife and so on than this coming about.

I have two really good roles on offer at the moment so this is in my personal choice to walk.

My concern was as others read, that they were insisting that I behave like a permie with regards to PAYE. I have spoken to a few people and that is not their take on the matter.

I will be continuing on the road and see what the IR35 review returns.

Thanks guys.

[northernladuk]

What do you think might happen if you sign?

And are you willing to walk away? Would rather have a couple of months at a client and in the negligble chance it might happen walk rather than sit on the bench IMO.

If you are not in one whats the problem? You got more chance of project being binned, getting walked for shagging boss's wife and so on than this coming about.

[Old Greg]

I have now had a response out of Capita and the omens appear ominous.

I had asked for clarification of the clause and to understand how far tax avoidance scheme reaches.

They have stated that they will not remove the clause. as it is there to protect them from contractors using offshore schemes (yawn) I, in turn have told the agent that I will be taking representation to review the contract in the whole, and that I have other offers on the table...

Capita are stating that this is to protect them from offshore tax schemes and money laundering. However I am very nervous of holding a contract that basically states that I will be held liable for paying myself as an employee, while stating that I am not one for the purpose of employment rights and protections, and that they will terminiate the contract as soon as HMRC come sniffing about.

Sad as usual its the client that will lose out in this...

What do you think might happen if you sign?

[bobspud]

I have now had a response out of Capita and the omens appear ominous.

I had asked for clarification of the clause and to understand how far tax avoidance scheme reaches.

They have stated that they will not remove the clause. as it is there to protect them from contractors using offshore schemes (yawn) I, in turn have told the agent that I will be taking representation to review the contract in the whole, and that I have other offers on the table...

Capita are stating that this is to protect them from offshore tax schemes and money laundering. However I am very nervous of holding a contract that basically states that I will be held liable for paying myself as an employee, while stating that I am not one for the purpose of employment rights and protections, and that they will terminiate the contract as soon as HMRC come sniffing about.

Sad as usual its the client that will lose out in this...