Reply to: IR35 Forum Administration Review now out

[Contreras]

This is clearly illustrated by the reasons for eliminating BETs. Contractors are reading the BET's and modifying their behavior accordingly to decrease their risk. This is utterly laughable as the expectation review panel seems to be that us taxpayers shouldn't modify our behavior and just get hammered with tax.

Laughable but also entirely foreseeable to anyone who didn't have their head stuck up the rear end of a hobby horse.

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

And what if that definition is achieved by encouraging them to incorporate as FLCs....?

I think that they could possibly come up with a definition that leaves FLCs as the only option but encouraging people to incorporate one way or another won't create a definition.

[eek]

Not just IPSE, but also several other professional bodies like ICAEW, CIOT and REC plus assorted independents like Kate Cotteril. If you want to rant, at least understand the target.

as Malvolio says these consultations featured everyone with more than a passing interest in IR35 and they all probably knew what the end result was likely to be before it began. You need to participate to get your voice and viewpoint heard but that doesn't mean its going to be listened to.

However if people didn't take part you can safely say that the end result would be far far worse.

[malvolio]

So why didn't they respond to scrapping IR35 as per the first paragraph?

Quite frankly the whole paper is about how HMRC have polished the turd that IR35 is over the last four years.

Why the PCG / IPSE are continuing with this review process is beyond me. My only conclusion is they have completely gone native and joined into the HRMC group think. After all they are on a payroll and like a bad contract at least the money keeps coming in.

This is clearly illustrated by the reasons for eliminating BETs. Contractors are reading the BET's and modifying their behavior accordingly to decrease their risk. This is utterly laughable as the expectation review panel seems to be that us taxpayers shouldn't modify our behavior and just get hammered with tax.

49 pages of total

<politicalrant> This perfectly illustrates the position of the Labour / Conservative and Liberal Democrat parties. Labour brought it in and the Conservative and Labour parties have polished it. Any talk about small business, innovation, entrepreneurship by these people deserves to be laughed at. </politicalrant>

Not IPSE, but also several other professional bodies like ICAEW, CIOT and REC plus assorted independents like Kate Cotteril. If you want to rant, at least understand the target.

[mudskipper]

But that's part of the problem - we all know what we mean by 'contractor' and we know that Ltd Co is a valid business mechanism for them - what HMG are beginning to see as contractors ranges from £1000 per day IT specialists to brickies to care workers to teachers to locums etc etc etc. It's like comparing apples to oranges - IMHO 'contractors' should be clearly defined and should be treated accordingly not lumped in with 'temps'

And what if that definition is achieved by encouraging them to incorporate as FLCs....?

[eek]

Nice jumble sale of words. What a disappointment, and it was a pretty low bar

To paraphrase, let's advertise IR35 better (x32). Good luck with that. Awareness and understanding are two totally different things, especially when IR35 was designed to complicate and obfuscate.

They don't want people to understand merely to be scared....

[jamesbrown]

Nice jumble sale of words. What a disappointment, and it was a pretty low bar

To paraphrase, let's advertise IR35 better (x32). Good luck with that. Awareness and understanding are two totally different things, especially when IR35 was designed to complicate and obfuscate.

[tractor]

All good points Sir and well made I am beginning to wonder though whether the political drive in all this is taking things in a direction which will actually make life more difficult for HMRC - employment law and all it entails is far more complex and subjective than tax law

That is why they have taken the ITEPA route to squeeze rather than the other more difficult route that would have given us a silver bullet. Remember, they could have attempted to define a PSC at any time since IR35 was implemented. They could have taken every single contested case to court. They did not because it would have clarified things in our favour by enshrining all we need to do to keep onside, in employment law.

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

+1 but you are preaching to the converted

I know sorry

HMRC see the task in the opposite light. The more people they can convince the gov that are 'temps' (albeit only in their view), the more weight their argument has, the more budget they get and the less work they have to do with every single contractor that becomes caught either by their own investigation or is driven to a brolly/perm by the fear of an investigation.

The HoL saw through them but unfortunately, they don't make and cannot influence government policy. Goverment policy decisions follow the money trail only. Yet a still more ridiculous situation exists that allows us to count the proceeds of drugs and prostitution in our GNP but also prevents us from taxing the same

All good points Sir and well made I am beginning to wonder though whether the political drive in all this is taking things in a direction which will actually make life more difficult for HMRC - employment law and all it entails is far more complex and subjective than tax law

[tractor]

...

But that's part of the problem - we all know what we mean by 'contractor' and we know that Ltd Co is a valid business mechanism for them - what HMG are beginning to see as contractors ranges from £1000 per day IT specialists to brickies to care workers to teachers to locums etc etc etc. It's like comparing apples to oranges - IMHO 'contractors' should be clearly defined and should be treated accordingly not lumped in with 'temps'

+1 but you are preaching to the converted

HMRC see the task in the opposite light. The more people they can convince the gov that are 'temps' (albeit only in their view), the more weight their argument has, the more budget they get and the less work they have to do with every single contractor that becomes caught either by their own investigation or is driven to a brolly/perm by the fear of an investigation.

The HoL saw through them but unfortunately, they don't make and cannot influence government policy. Goverment policy decisions follow the money trail only. Yet a still more ridiculous situation exists that allows us to count the proceeds of drugs and prostitution in our GNP but also prevents us from taxing the same

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

Exactly.

But importantly, there are hundreds of thousands of us that don't work via brollies. That is why our problems won't go away until HMRC has us all firmly in the fold. If IPSE is to be believed, there are 4.5m of us. And the number will only grow when unscrupulous care companies amongst others realise they can get away with forced self employment.

But that's part of the problem - we all know what we mean by 'contractor' and we know that Ltd Co is a valid business mechanism for them - what HMG are beginning to see as contractors ranges from £1000 per day IT specialists to brickies to care workers to teachers to locums etc etc etc. It's like comparing apples to oranges - IMHO 'contractors' should be clearly defined and should be treated accordingly not lumped in with 'temps'

[tractor]

.....

No reaction over on IPSE forum.

With the impending AGM and governance proposals, there won't be.

I suggest the lurkers here and the lurkers there familiarise themselves with the proposals and make their vote count on 24th January. Your PCG needs you!

[Pondlife]

No reaction over on IPSE forum.

[tractor]

...

FTFY

My NY resolution was to be non-contentious. I have no idea how long it will last Plus we have to call it PSC because our noble Lords said so (pompous arses).

[RasputinDude]

They will squeeze the life out of it so that few will do business with what they consider a PSC FLC .

FTFY