• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Collapse

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "Extending beyond 24 months"

Collapse

  • tarbera
    replied
    How much expenses ? I ask because one chap was going to give up a contract last week as he could not claim £31.50 a week?

    If hundreds for hotels , ask client to reduce your rate and pay your hotel directly for you - job done

    Leave a comment:


  • LondonManc
    replied
    Originally posted by exiledinlondon View Post
    NLUK - thanks for that clarification. On the point of the client viewing the contractor as 'part and parcel', wouldn't that be covered under mutuality of obligation?
    The WFH route is very much a possibility. However, my final question is would combining this gig for 3/4 days with another gig for an old client of mine
    protect against the 'part and parcel' determination?
    Have a read through this:
    IR35 - Part and parcel of the organisation :: Contractor UK

    Leave a comment:


  • northernladuk
    replied
    Not quite. Being part and parcel is a mix of various bad things. MoO is about accepting work outside the current agreement. Although complicated it focuses just on that area. Part and parcel can be a whole number of things lumped in.

    Your general understanding is a little lacking as well. IR35 is on a contract by contract basis. Having another contract has zero bearing on the other one. You could be inside for both if you do it wrong. Getting the general understanding right is key before trying to guess other more complicated aspects.
    Last edited by northernladuk; 22 February 2017, 13:15.

    Leave a comment:


  • exiledinlondon
    replied
    NLUK - thanks for that clarification. On the point of the client viewing the contractor as 'part and parcel', wouldn't that be covered under mutuality of obligation?
    The WFH route is very much a possibility. However, my final question is would combining this gig for 3/4 days with another gig for an old client of mine
    protect against the 'part and parcel' determination?

    Leave a comment:


  • LondonManc
    replied
    Just be careful on the IR35 front - the one thing that they might be able to get you on is part and parcel; have you become accepted as a permie in disguise in their eyes?

    Leave a comment:


  • MrMarkyMark
    replied
    Originally posted by exiledinlondon View Post
    Hi there. Done quite a few contracts in my time and never been with a (private sector) client more than 24 months because of the rule around expense claims.
    Since I am approaching that stage now and quite like this gig, so long as there is a clearly defined deliverable over the extension,
    contract has been reviewed and accepted as outside IR35 (and working practices do reflect this), is there any reason why I should not
    extend with this client apart from the fact that the expenses will now have to come out of any dividends drawn?
    Depends how much they want and trust you.

    Where I am now, someone negotiated 100% WFH purely due to the 2 year expenses rule.

    Leave a comment:


  • northernladuk
    replied
    Purely your call. We can't make that decision for you. Remember you have to stop claiming at the point you expect to be there over 24 months. Not at 24 months.

    Leave a comment:


  • TheCyclingProgrammer
    replied
    As long as it's still worth while after your travel costs then extend it. See if you can negotiate some WFH to reduce your costs.

    Leave a comment:


  • exiledinlondon
    started a topic Extending beyond 24 months

    Extending beyond 24 months

    Hi there. Done quite a few contracts in my time and never been with a (private sector) client more than 24 months because of the rule around expense claims.
    Since I am approaching that stage now and quite like this gig, so long as there is a clearly defined deliverable over the extension,
    contract has been reviewed and accepted as outside IR35 (and working practices do reflect this), is there any reason why I should not
    extend with this client apart from the fact that the expenses will now have to come out of any dividends drawn?

Working...
X