Reply to: HMT Review for public sector client?

[DirtyDog]

Agreed - walk away but only IF the contract is IR35 caught and you cannot negotiate a big enough increase to cover that additional liability.

FTFY

[Wanderer]

The default approach would be to jump straight to Route 2 regardless of the client's requirements and if the review deems the gig to be within IR35 then you have the choice to either walk away or start paying yourself a full salary (that is, stop taking divi's).

In my case, I think I would walk away.

Agreed - walk away but only IF the contract is IR35 caught.

If the contract is reviewed and found to be OUTSIDE IR35 then you have the co-operation of the client to produce a "confirmation of working arrangements" document which is a good thing because you can use it for your IR35 defence if it's ever required...

[bracken]

A QDOS review is fine

I went through all this palaver a couple of monte back (I actually left the PS over it) but one thing that was confirmed before I left was that for the Cabinet Office at least, the QDOS review was deemed to be acceptable evidence of being outside of IR35.

[DaveB]

Wrong word perhaps. "Scruples" as in "I am happy to pay IR35 whether it applies to me or not" or "I work through an umbrella so I don't care anyway". As opposed to "I'll be buggered if I'll pay taxes I don't owe".

Still not right. I'm working a PS contract ATM and have been for the last 18 months. I'm outside IR35, have jumped through the hoops of the PS review, provided the information asked for and had the box ticked to carry on.

Most of the big departments don't have the time or resources to do anything but tick the box that says the BET was low risk or the contract review was passed for IR35 and leave it at that.

[mudskipper]

"I'll be buggered if I'll pay taxes I don't owe".

I thought that was what happened if you didn't pay taxes you did owe.

[malvolio]

It has nothing to do with scruples - it's purely down to risk management.

Wrong word perhaps. "Scruples" as in "I am happy to pay IR35 whether it applies to me or not" or "I work through an umbrella so I don't care anyway". As opposed to "I'll be buggered if I'll pay taxes I don't owe".

[cojak]

No, they merely outsource to offshore providers or give it to people with fewer scruples. 40% of work is Public Sector, why should we be closed off from it? And why should they be denied access to the best resources?

It has nothing to do with scruples - it's purely down to risk management.

[Sausage Surprise]

No, they merely outsource to offshore providers - doubtful because of the public outcry. Also offshore isn't that cheap anymore.

or give it to people with fewer scruples - my point

. 40% of work is Public Sector - source ?

why should we be closed off from it - see my point again. We won't be if we stick together.

? And why should they be denied access to the best resources? - err... because of the tulip we are getting or haven't you read the original post?

[malvolio]

Precisely!

If we all did that they'd be right in the tulip!

No, they merely outsource to offshore providers or give it to people with fewer scruples. 40% of work is Public Sector, why should we be closed off from it? And why should they be denied access to the best resources?

[Sausage Surprise]

I just say "No Thanks".

Precisely!

If we all did that they'd be right in the tulip!

[malvolio]

The other point is that the vast majority of PS contracts are let via the same agency, Capita, using the same contract. That contract has been reviewed multiple times by multiple sources and come out as outside IR35 every time as far as I am aware.

So far it's shaping up to be a bit of a storm in a teacup I think. The only net effect seems to be to create a new business stream for the various contactor tax and accountancy specialists.

PCG doesn't charge for legal advice and support to its members...

This is the Alexander Review's fault; the rules haven't changed in the slightest, but the Departments have to demonstrate compliance with the Review. Needless to say, nobody's defined how to do that , so they are all making up their own version. PCG's aim is to get a single view of the truth and stop this nonsense in its tracks.

[girlfriday]

thanks everyone for your quick responses! So glad I'm not just being touchy.... I fully intend to walk away from this one....

[DaveB]

The other point is that the vast majority of PS contracts are let via the same agency, Capita, using the same contract. That contract has been reviewed multiple times by multiple sources and come out as outside IR35 every time as far as I am aware.

So far it's shaping up to be a bit of a storm in a teacup I think. The only net effect seems to be to create a new business stream for the various contactor tax and accountancy specialists.

[Project Monkey]

The default approach would be to jump straight to Route 2 regardless of the client's requirements and if the review deems the gig to be within IR35 then you have the choice to either walk away or start paying yourself a full salary (that is, stop taking divi's).

In my case, I think I would walk away.

[malvolio]

Hi,

I have had the very same letter.
I totally agree and don't think you're being touchy at all. The problem is that if we don't comply we are likely to have our contracts terminated so the decision is yours to make.

I used QDOS to review my contract and working practices via their "Public Sector Pack", I then sent in the certificate they they sent back which luckily stated that I am outside IR35 (in their professional opinion of course).
After 3 weeks I am yet to hear anything back, but this is a government client so I won't be holding my breath.

Get hold of the PCG now. They have already run workshops on this for contractors in the Home Office, the Cabinet Office and the Ministry of Justice, and have come to sensible conclusions with all three. They will be happy to talk to you, even if you aren't a member (yet... ).

Contact via the website or email publicsectorreview@pcg.org.uk A summary of their position can be seen here