Reply to: Enforced Contractor Layoff in December

[northernladuk]

It's never ending isn't it?

Contractors at HSBC in London to take 10 percent pay cut - source | Reuters

It's BAU is what you should be thinking. Won't get surprised when it happens

[oliverson]

It's never ending isn't it?

Contractors at HSBC in London to take 10 percent pay cut - source | Reuters

[MrMarkyMark]

It seems HSBC 'Investment Bank' (presumably GB&M) have been given a 10% cut plus two weeks down at Xmas. Surely the rest of the bank must follow?

Doesn't always follow. I have never been asked to take furlough, for example, where others are always asked.
Also, not everyone is treated the same, regardless odf what is said, both in the terms of furlow or rate reduction.

[Cirrus]

HSBC 10% Cut

It seems HSBC 'Investment Bank' (presumably GB&M) have been given a 10% cut plus two weeks down at Xmas. Surely the rest of the bank must follow?

[MrMarkyMark]

Indeed but we did have a discussion about how we could find out how many people that aren't on our radar fold and pay up. People that don't have insurance, post on forums or take any interest in IPSE etc so don't show up in the stats. I seem to think the thread mentioned the amount of money HMRC apparently recovered which didn't match the low number of investigates the insurance guys quote.

I can't find the thread but there is an article on here about figures and number of investigations.

So, how much do IR35 investigations raise for HMRC?

It also mentioned the deterrent which is interesting. How many people would not be with an Umbrella or claiming inside without it?



Completely incorrect statement. We spend hours discussing it because it's interesting and although wasn't, it most certainly is now one of the biggest threats to Contracting. Over the period of a contract the time spent doing your best to stay out of IR35 is absolutely minimal and well worth doing so not to be one of the figures mentioned in the article above. It's fine winning a case but the idea is not to have one brought at all. We've had a couple of people post on here in a right state because investigations have started. last one was that guy that was still fighting it 2 years down the line. Spending a bit of time doing some diligence to avoid that is a no brainer surely?

Interesting, I must have missed that thread.
Totally agree with the last paragraph, trying to avoid an investigation and a negative life changing experience with minmial effort should be the first thing you do.

[northernladuk]

I think that, in reality, there would be even less chance of losing than that. Most of the HMRC wins tend to be the most extreme examples, IMO.

Indeed but we did have a discussion about how we could find out how many people that aren't on our radar fold and pay up. People that don't have insurance, post on forums or take any interest in IPSE etc so don't show up in the stats. I seem to think the thread mentioned the amount of money HMRC apparently recovered which didn't match the low number of investigates the insurance guys quote.

I can't find the thread but there is an article on here about figures and number of investigations.

So, how much do IR35 investigations raise for HMRC?

It also mentioned the deterrent which is interesting. How many people would not be with an Umbrella or claiming inside without it?

yet some people(!) spend minutes/hours per day worrying about it

Completely incorrect statement. We spend hours discussing it because it's interesting and although wasn't, it most certainly is now one of the biggest threats to Contracting. Over the period of a contract the time spent doing your best to stay out of IR35 is absolutely minimal and well worth doing so not to be one of the figures mentioned in the article above. It's fine winning a case but the idea is not to have one brought at all. We've had a couple of people post on here in a right state because investigations have started. last one was that guy that was still fighting it 2 years down the line. Spending a bit of time doing some diligence to avoid that is a no brainer surely?

[LondonManc]

MoO is about work above and beyond the current contract, not while you are in it. This would come under financial risk...although you could argue it's trumped by D&C as permies have to do it as well. The reality is it is neutral as this an operation requirement by the customer that out of your control so can't use it as defense or a problem I'd say.

Permies get to choose what time of year they take their two-week holiday. Back when I was perm in a different FS, it was made clear when I started that I must take ten continuous business days off but could do so at any time within the calendar year.

Contractors having enforced furloughs is a totally different working practice and as such will come under the financial risk aspect that you've mentioned. Some FS ClientCos don't enforce the furlough, hence the risk is that they might, rather than they will. If you're on a reg project, it might be the case that you're expected to be in.

[MrMarkyMark]

chance of losing (assuming you have qdos/ipse etc cover) about 1/100? **

I think that, in reality, there would be even less chance of losing than that. Most of the HMRC wins tend to be the most extreme examples, IMO.

Worth asking client to force you to take a week off at xmas then!

Possibly, but as said before, there could have been other factors. If there was enough of something else to proceed I'm sure they (HMRC) would have done.
The thing is, in reality, he was a self confessed, bum on seat even he thought he would be IR35 caught.

[psychocandy]

You are free to believe exactly what you want .

Maybe there were other factors, but I can assure you that the final decision was made due to that fact of having enforced time off.
To be honest other contractors and me thought he would be totally caught, we had been joking about it for a few years.
It puts things into perspective sightly, with regards to the actual risk of being IR35 caught.

Worth asking client to force you to take a week off at xmas then!

[pr1]

You are free to believe exactly what you want .

Maybe there were other factors, but I can assure you that the final decision was made due to that fact of having enforced time off.
To be honest other contractors and me thought he would be totally caught, we had been joking about it for a few years.
It puts things into perspective sightly, with regards to the actual risk of being IR35 caught.

indeed, risk of investigation approx 1/1000 *
chance of losing (assuming you have qdos/ipse etc cover) about 1/100? **

1 in 100k chance of IR35 caught (until april 2017 obv)? yet some people(!) spend minutes/hours per day worrying about it

*In full: The Abbey Tax response to the Intermediaries Legislation (IR35) discussion document | The Abbey Tax Blog
section 2, 2nd paragraph
** complete guess

[MrMarkyMark]

I do find that very hard to believe. A mitigating factor maybe but not a 5 year gig on the basis of that alone. I didn't think they give a single reason for dropping investigations either.

You are free to believe exactly what you want .

Maybe there were other factors, but I can assure you that the final decision was made due to that fact of having enforced time off.
To be honest other contractors and me thought he would be totally caught, we had been joking about it for a few years.
It puts things into perspective sightly, with regards to the actual risk of being IR35 caught.

[northernladuk]

I can confirm, however, that a mate of mine fought an IR35 claim, against a quite iffy 5 year contract, on the basis of an enforced unpaid time off.
HMRC dropped it on the basis of this alone.

I do find that very hard to believe. A mitigating factor maybe but not a 5 year gig on the basis of that alone. I didn't think they give a single reason for dropping investigations either.

[MrMarkyMark]

Absolutely correct but read my comment on page 2. The op explicity mentions contractors AND permie..

Ths is a type of block leave. Most banks enforce it for both Perm and contract.
Obviously, clients would rather that contractors took this off at christmas, as there is little going on.

Its a little inconsistant though, as I have never been asked to take it.

I can confirm, however, that a mate of mine fought an IR35 claim, against a quite iffy 5 year contract, on the basis of an enforced unpaid time off.
HMRC dropped it on the basis of this alone.

[northernladuk]

Pretty sure being told not to come in, while permie's still have to is a very strong defence against IR35 - it was mentioned as a factor in a successful judgement against IR35 a few years back.

Silver bullet, not quite - but I'd feel very confident if furloughed (the term for it) during a gig.

Absolutely correct but read my comment on page 2. The op explicity mentions contractors AND permie..

[centurian]

Indeed hence the financial risk but it's still imposed to all so not a differentiator in its own right.

Pretty sure being told not to come in, while permie's still have to is a very strong defence against IR35 - it was mentioned as a factor in a successful judgement against IR35 a few years back.

Silver bullet, not quite - but I'd feel very confident if furloughed (the term for it) during a gig.