Reply to: advice please

[noob23]

thanks for the replies...
I found this - all very confusing as it doesn't appear to differentiate between a ltd company and self employed/sole trader instead referring to a "business"

https://www.ipse.co.uk/guides/new-re...ments-agencies

[TheFaQQer]

Self employed = sole trader, As a director of YourCo you re employee of YourCo but NOT employee of the ClientCo. Common misconception is that because the ltd contractors are working for their own business they are "self-employed".

Unless you have a contract of employment, you aren't an employee either.

[sal]

Hi Simon thanks for your swift response - I am a Director of my Ltd Co...
I am finding this all rather confusing - can you elaborate on your post please?

Self employed = sole trader, As a director of YourCo you re employee of YourCo but NOT employee of the ClientCo. Common misconception is that because the ltd contractors are working for their own business they are "self-employed".

[noob23]

Hi Simon thanks for your swift response - I am a Director of my Ltd Co...
I am finding this all rather confusing - can you elaborate on your post please?

[SimonMac]

well after a weekend of digging I believe I may have found what the agency is getting at...
hardly new legislation...
has anyone written a statement for their agency?

Agencies engaging workers on a self-employed basis

From 6 April 2014, UK agencies supplying workers directly to a client on a self-employed basis must have in their power or possession satisfactory evidence to demonstrate the worker is not subject to (or to the right of) supervision, direction, or control (see ESM2037) by any person, in relation to the manner in which the worker provides their services.

HMRC do not consider a signed declaration from the worker that simply states they are not subject to (or to a right of) supervision, direction, or control by anyone constitutes sufficient evidence for the purposes of the Agency Legislation.

If the agency is unable to produce satisfactory evidence when requested by HMRC, then HMRC may recover from the agency the income tax and NICs due from the worker’s remuneration.

But you are not self employed?

[noob23]

well after a weekend of digging I believe I may have found what the agency is getting at...
hardly new legislation...
has anyone written a statement for their agency?

Agencies engaging workers on a self-employed basis

From 6 April 2014, UK agencies supplying workers directly to a client on a self-employed basis must have in their power or possession satisfactory evidence to demonstrate the worker is not subject to (or to the right of) supervision, direction, or control (see ESM2037) by any person, in relation to the manner in which the worker provides their services.

HMRC do not consider a signed declaration from the worker that simply states they are not subject to (or to a right of) supervision, direction, or control by anyone constitutes sufficient evidence for the purposes of the Agency Legislation.

If the agency is unable to produce satisfactory evidence when requested by HMRC, then HMRC may recover from the agency the income tax and NICs due from the worker’s remuneration.

[noob23]

thanks again for the responses...

So basically it seems that according to new legislation, that HMRC will be looking at me as a PSC (ltd co) to prove I am self employed(according to the agency). The agency essentially wants me to show them in writing how I will fulfil the work at the client site but not be under the direction or supervision of the client... (determine own hours/where possible use own equipment etc)
It seems they apparently need to show that they have taken reasonable steps to ensure this, thus the letter is a way to indemnify them of any future recourse from HMRC, should they chase firstly myself and subsequently them for unpaid PAYE/NI...

Has anyone come across this at all? It really seems quite odd

[DS23]

whs

[mudskipper]

Nothing to add, but your correct use of advice and advise makes my heart sing! Welcome to CUK


(Shame about the missing apostrophes)

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

I think this will explain why it's been asked for: False self-employment rules offer PSCs an

[noob23]

Thanks for the replies....
Ive not seen the contract as yet. I have pushed back on this request and sought the agency to clarify why they want it and to what ends it will serve. So far all I know is its been suggested it is due to their stance on new hmrc intermediary and psc legislation?..
My feeling is my opinion is neither here nor there, it is the contract that will be scrutinised and dictate the relationship... and as such should reflect that I choose what days I work and include substitution clauses etc...
Im not sure what a letter from myself would achieve? Though appreciate I could be missing something???

Is there a checklist for the main clauses to fall outside of IR35?


Thanks again
.

[tractor]

......

When will agents realise that their lawyers are out to fleece them by inventing risks and REC and APSCO are happy to perpetuate it because it means more membership fees?

[BrilloPad]

Hoping someone can advise...

Im about to start a new contract but the agency has requested I confirm the reasons on co. headed paper why in my opinion, as a contractor, and based on the contract outline I will be under the direct supervision and control of my ltd company not the client or the agency.

Ive not come across this before.. has anyone else got any thoughts?
Many thanks

Have you asked what others contractors usually put?

[TheFaQQer]

Because the contract says so, if it doesn't amend it.

Sounds confused.

"I'll probably not be under d&c of the agency as I will most likely never ever have comms with them again."

+1 - combine those.

1) No representative of <myCo> will not be under the direction and control of the client because of the way that we operate, the way the client operates, and the contractual terms between both <myCo> and agency, and between agency and clientco.

2) Based on past performance, once I'm working I never hear from an agent until the end of the contract, so to suggest any representative of <myCo> is under their direction and control is laughable.

[SimonMac]

Because there should be no direct contract between you as an individual and either the client or the agent.

This is very strange, is it a big agency? has the contract been checked by a third party?