Reply to: Working inside IR35

[Sausage Surprise]

Because it is the law? Is that just me being naive?

If HMRC wishes to enforce IR35 better, would it not make sense to make clients just as liable as contractors? As far as I can see, the burden lies with contractors only. Even though clients are the ones writing the contracts and setting the working conditions.

If you're that concerned or worried just go back to Umbrella. Clients don't give a hoot about your IR35 status (unless it's Public Sector and that's another can of worms)

[SueEllen]

Thanks for the replies people, but to reiterate my main question here in a non hypothetical frame:
Has anyone ever attempted negotiating working conditions where they were unfavourable?

If contractors were all doing this, wouldn't it make the industry better? Why not negotiate before walking away?

I've turned down contracts where the working practices were unfavourable. In my case I turndown contracts with working hours which mean I have to sit in traffic if I have to drive. I always state this to the agent.

[lacan]

Thanks for the replies people, but to reiterate my main question here in a non hypothetical frame:
Has anyone ever attempted negotiating working conditions where they were unfavourable?

If contractors were all doing this, wouldn't it make the industry better? Why not negotiate before walking away?

[SlipTheJab]

This come from a guy that’s always pouncing my spelling errors, complaining that I don’t use the speller check makes you look like a fool.

At least I have an excuse, I’m not British.

Correct your errors and shut up.

In the words of Micheal Winner 'Calm down dear'

[LondonManc]

Because it is the law? Is that just me being naive?

If HMRC wishes to enforce IR35 better, would it not make sense to make clients just as liable as contractors? As far as I can see, the burden lies with contractors only. Even though clients are the ones writing the contracts and setting the working conditions.

Unfortunately naïve. Clients, as NLUK said, don't give a toss about our tax status. It's up to us as a business to do so because we have to. Their company lawyer(s) and accountants will handle their tax status. At its simplest level (the contract), QDOS (for example) will handle ours and our accountant will implement accordingly.

[SueEllen]

Because it is the law? Is that just me being naive?

If HMRC wishes to enforce IR35 better, would it not make sense to make clients just as liable as contractors? As far as I can see, the burden lies with contractors only. Even though clients are the ones writing the contracts and setting the working conditions.

Agents write the contracts while clients provide the working conditions.

When clients write the contracts those in the know ensure you are outside IR35.

[lacan]

While you're right, there are too many contractors who will blindly accept a contract as outside of IR35 because the agent told them that it was, so why, in their mind, should they bend over for a fussy one?

Because it is the law? Is that just me being naive?

If HMRC wishes to enforce IR35 better, would it not make sense to make clients just as liable as contractors? As far as I can see, the burden lies with contractors only. Even though clients are the ones writing the contracts and setting the working conditions.

[LondonManc]

Just to be clear, I am talking about setting the right working practices - not just fudging a contract to look good, I have no interest in that. I see what you are saying though, the degree of flexibility is around which party needs the other more.

Clients won't care about our tax status, but they will care about attracting the best contractors, and keeping them on for renewals. So it is in clients interest to be genuinely IR35 compliant.
Hiring anyone is a right pain, if they spend a week dealing with that, only to have the contractor walk on the first day over conditions would they just shrug? They might have a second choice lined up but what's to say they won't do the same.

The idea that clients are not willing to being compliant is different from the idea that they just do not know how - and if they don't who will explain it to them but contractors?

This is surely a part of doing good business, rather than just packing it in and going elsewhere?

While you're right, there are too many contractors who will blindly accept a contract as outside of IR35 because the agent told them that it was, so why, in their mind, should they bend over for a fussy one?

[Bee]

Coming from the guy that posted 'Xenofobia' in Word Associations....

This come from a guy that’s always pouncing my spelling errors, complaining that I don’t use the speller check makes you look like a fool.

At least I have an excuse, I’m not British.

Correct your errors and shut up.

[lacan]

Just to be clear, I am talking about setting the right working practices - not just fudging a contract to look good, I have no interest in that. I see what you are saying though, the degree of flexibility is around which party needs the other more.

Clients won't care about our tax status, but they will care about attracting the best contractors, and keeping them on for renewals. So it is in clients interest to be genuinely IR35 compliant.
Hiring anyone is a right pain, if they spend a week dealing with that, only to have the contractor walk on the first day over conditions would they just shrug? They might have a second choice lined up but what's to say they won't do the same.

The idea that clients are not willing to being compliant is different from the idea that they just do not know how - and if they don't who will explain it to them but contractors?

This is surely a part of doing good business, rather than just packing it in and going elsewhere?

[northernladuk]

Coming from the guy that posted 'Xenofobia' in Word Associations....

[Bee]

Not really. Generally our tax problems are of no concern to the client. The fact you are inside our outside doesn't matter one jot to them. That said... If they can't get the right person then it is in their interests to be flexible about it BUT being flexible means they must have the right mindset, understand what you are and engage you properly.
If flexible means willing to put sham clauses in just to get you outside then you've gained nothing but a potential problem. HMRC will interview them and if they explain they just wanted a permatemp but fudged it for you to be outside you are screwed. I'd not be entertaining that for one minute. It's either genuinely outside and can defend that successfully or I walk. The stress and numbers involved in investigations are just not worth the risk for me and there is always other work out there. There has to be else contracting wouldn't work.

[northernladuk]

So to update on this - I have had a talk to the client about it and they are taking it to the HR people. They may be willing to be flexible, if not I will stick inside but probably avoid any renewal.

It seems as I thought and the client is not all that familiar with IR35 in practical terms, they are a fairly new organisation.

Surely if contractors wish to operate outside IR35, it's in our advantage to talk to clients about this and request adjustments? Or do all other contractors simply flounce from a contract if it turns out to be inside?

Not really. Generally our tax problems are of no concern to the client. The fact you are inside our outside doesn't matter one jot to them. That said... If they can't get the right person then it is in their interests to be flexible about it BUT being flexible means they must have the right mindset, understand what you are and engage you properly.
If flexible means willing to put sham clauses in just to get you outside then you've gained nothing but a potential problem. HMRC will interview them and if they explain they just wanted a permatemp but fudged it for you to be outside you are screwed. I'd not be entertaining that for one minute. It's either genuinely outside and can defend that successfully or I walk. The stress and numbers involved in investigations are just not worth the risk for me and there is always other work out there. There has to be else contracting wouldn't work.

[lacan]

So to update on this - I have had a talk to the client about it and they are taking it to the HR people. They may be willing to be flexible, if not I will stick inside but probably avoid any renewal.

It seems as I thought and the client is not all that familiar with IR35 in practical terms, they are a fairly new organisation.

Surely if contractors wish to operate outside IR35, it's in our advantage to talk to clients about this and request adjustments? Or do all other contractors simply flounce from a contract if it turns out to be inside?

[elpato]

We've been through this plenty of times. Everyone has to do these that work with client regardless of method of engagement so part of the business protecting itself. Just get on with it. If you refuse you won't to be allowed to work on site anyway.

Cheers, good to know. Fairly new to the forum/contracting so haven't seen this in the past! Did these in the first week of the contract anyway