Reply to: Looking for an IR35 consultant

[Wanderer]

Let me fill you in. Qdos have not suggested a way to resolve the query. I am fishing for specialist consultants who I know read this forum and already got the leads in the replies above. So thank you, addressing the forum has helped.

Is it that you are going contracting with a client where you have been working as a PAYE employee within the last 12 months and you are looking for a way to arrange that so it's outside IR35?

If so, then give up. This is exactly what IR35 was brought in to counter so unless you do it as a fixed price job and subcontract at least 50% of the work and have multiple clients then you aren't going to be outside IR35 no matter how many times you ask.

[mickey]

Let me fill you in. Qdos have not suggested a way to resolve the query. I am fishing for specialist consultants who I know read this forum and already got the leads in the replies above. So thank you, addressing the forum has helped.

[DirtyDog]

Duh! Why haven't I thought of that?

Of course I did. The contract and WP in Qdos opinion were fine. The relationship with the client was a risk item (even though I was never employed by the client).

So, you asked an expert, who makes their living advising on IR35 issues, but you thought that the thing to then do was to see if someone on CUK wanted to advise you instead?

Maybe I missed the thread - which one was it that suggested that the normal poster here is more clued up than the expert you paid to review the situation?

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

If you want to consider how HMRC would view your IR35 position - have a look here http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/ir35/guidance.pdf

[mickey]

Sure, no harm in getting a second opinion. Opinions do vary. I would expect that it has already been flagged as borderline though, and no opinion will really obfuscate the need for the OP to make a risk-based decision for themselves, as it isn't HMRC that decides, ultimately.

Thank you, correct, it's a borderline case and therefore got to be a risk-based decision.

[mickey]

Have you asked Qdos?

Duh! Why haven't I thought of that?

Of course I did. The contract and WP in Qdos opinion were fine. The relationship with the client was a risk item (even though I was never employed by the client).

[DirtyDog]

This is necessary but not sufficient according to QDOS.

Have you asked Qdos?

[jamesbrown]

I agree, but the OP wants someone who 'knows' what HMRC expects and Kate knows that....

Sure, no harm in getting a second opinion. Opinions do vary. I would expect that it has already been flagged as borderline though, and no opinion will really obfuscate the need for the OP to make a risk-based decision for themselves, as it isn't HMRC that decides, ultimately.

[cojak]

If she does, I would anticipate that Qdos told the OP something similar, or at least flagged the situation as very borderline, assuming that they did actually review the working practices, including the prior arrangement as communicated to them.

I agree, but the OP wants someone who 'knows' what HMRC expects and Kate knows that....

[jamesbrown]

I would just contact Kate Cottrell.

She'll probably tell you what you (don't) want to hear.

If she does, I would anticipate that Qdos told the OP something similar, or at least flagged the situation as very borderline, assuming that they did actually review the working practices, including the prior arrangement as communicated to them.

[cojak]

I would just contact Kate Cottrell.

She'll probably tell you what you (don't) want to hear.

[jamesbrown]

This is necessary but not sufficient according to QDOS.

Eh? It is necessary and sufficient, because part of the working practices relate to your previous arrangement with the client. That said, two factors to consider: 1) opinions could vary on your status, so it will partly depend on your tolerance to risk; and 2) can you say enough about your working practices now versus when it matters (i.e. when you've been working under this arrangement for a period)? You say you've had your working practices reviewed. As part of that review, you would've needed to demonstrate that the new arrangement is substantially different from the old one, in order to have a realistic chance of lack of D&C and/or MoO.

[cojak]

How the previous relationships with the client affect the IR35 status.




This is necessary but not sufficient according to QDOS.



Done enough of that. Someone who used to work for HMRC painted a completely different picture for me as far as Fri-Mon scenarios are concerned. Want to speak to someone who is familiar with how HMRC look at such cases to make sure my inside/outside conclusion is well-grounded.

Kate Cottrell is familiar with how HMRC look at such cases. Look up Bauer and Cottrell and ask to speak to her.

But generally, if you start with the same client on Monday that you left as an employee on a Friday then you're caught.

[mickey]

What do you mean by IR35 Consultant? What do you want to know?

How the previous relationships with the client affect the IR35 status.

If the contract and working practices have been assessed then you are ready to go.

This is necessary but not sufficient according to QDOS.

I would advise that you research IR35 yourself.

Done enough of that. Someone who used to work for HMRC painted a completely different picture for me as far as Fri-Mon scenarios are concerned. Want to speak to someone who is familiar with how HMRC look at such cases to make sure my inside/outside conclusion is well-grounded.

[cojak]

What do you mean by IR35 Consultant? What do you want to know? And how much are you willing to pay (or do you expect this IR35 Consultant to give you a price up front)?

If the contract and working practices have been assessed then you are ready to go.

I would advise that you research IR35 yourself.

Google 'in business in your own account' or 'in business on my own account' and start reading.