Originally posted by eek
View Post
- 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.
Logging in...
Previously on "Cutting out the middleman, working direct?"
Collapse
-
-
Originally posted by Paralytic View PostI did, and it is potentially ambiguous. So, going direct does not, in itself, change the profile risk that comes from IR35, but I accept the nature of such engagement may mean other mitigations can be put in place (eg ability to amend the contract).
In my case, it's also involved a bit of juggling multiple clients and such. Again, not definitive in themselves (And we all know IR35 is per contract blah blah) but in my case direct is synonymous with being miles away from IR35.
The downside being stupidity like still having a weeks work of work to book in on a project that should have finished back in the summer.Last edited by vwdan; 21 October 2020, 09:40.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by jamesbrown View PostAgree. It’s causation vs. correlation. Going direct in itself is irrelevant because the hypothetical contract ignores *all* intermediaries. However, going direct is quite often correlated with good working practices.
If you are going direct they are using you to solve a problem they have.
If they are using an agency they are looking at an employee type relationship to solve that problem.
Yes IR35 is an still a possible issue (as is blanket bans on PSCs) but there is clearly a better relationship provided you are on project based work (and subsequent support work is on connected to that project work).
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Paralytic View PostI did, and it is potentially ambiguous. So, going direct does not, in itself, change the profile risk that comes from IR35, but I accept the nature of such engagement may mean other mitigations can be put in place (eg ability to amend the contract).
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by jamesbrown View PostRe-read that post. It wasn’t just about going direct, rather about ad-hoc work (e.g., see SPL vs. HMRC).
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Paralytic View PostWhy is going direct better for IR35?
Leave a comment:
-
I've done a lot of direct work. All T&M, but no "traditional" contracts - in my world, direct implies ad-hoc. So, generally better rates and a proper B2B relationship, but lots of juggling and less guarantee of work. I've been let down and messed around a lot by projects not starting on time and such.
Overall, there are pros and cons and I can't honestly say I prefer either.
Great for IR35, though.
Leave a comment:
-
My first contract was direct with a big fashion retailer in the UK. 90 day terms and £10 per day extra over an agency worker.
Leave a comment:
-
I've had a different experience. Gone direct on 3 contracts. 2 were weekly with 10 day terms, 1 was monthly with 30 day terms. Had 1 or 2 missed/late payments but these were much easier to chase up than when I've had same issues going through an agency.
I prefer to go direct. I'd rather get paid more or be cheaper to the client, both of those benefit me. If I'm cheaper (still making same money) I'll probably be kept on longer and if I earn more well hopefully I don't have to explain why that's beneficial.
I would work direct 100% of the time if I had the choice.
Leave a comment:
-
QDOS have a standard contract which is Outside IR35 compliant on their website which you can use. I had to mod this a little to go direct and then had it doublechecked by QDOS.
I still invoice the client every week, and payment terms can be negotiated but 30 days is still very possible. After having delays in payment for the first few weeks, the client soon sorted it out with their accounts and now its like clockwork.
So much better to cut out the agent, and what more the client is making a nice saving so is now talking about an extension.
Leave a comment:
-
I have 2 contracts which are direct. For one, they asked me to write the contract so I just copied an old one I had, changing the names and that was fine. Stuck in a standard 30 day payment term and am always paid before that so quite happy with it. The other one I don't even have a contract and have been with them for 5 years now, I send in the invoice at the end of the month and am paid, latest, 2 days after. However, I have had direct ones in the past and as people have pointed out, payment can be difficult and chasing it up even more difficult as you have to do it directly with the client.
Leave a comment:
-
IPSE provide a reasonable contract template you can use.
See what the client says through. They may insist on their Ts and Cs.
IR35 is unchanged. If anything you’re in a better position as there’s be no agency-client contract that you cannot see and review.
Also ask the client what their view is if April IR35 changes. If they’re a small company it’s not their problem. If not they can’t just ignore it so best to work with them now.
Leave a comment:
-
Most likely you can forget about weekly invoicing. Payment terms can be up to 90 days and still you will have to chase it
Leave a comment:
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Streamline Your Retirement with iSIPP: A Solution for Contractor Pensions Sep 1 09:13
- Making the most of pension lump sums: overview for contractors Sep 1 08:36
- Umbrella company tribunal cases are opening up; are your wages subject to unlawful deductions, too? Aug 31 08:38
- Contractors, relabelling 'labour' as 'services' to appear 'fully contracted out' won't dupe IR35 inspectors Aug 31 08:30
- How often does HMRC check tax returns? Aug 30 08:27
- Work-life balance as an IT contractor: 5 top tips from a tech recruiter Aug 30 08:20
- Autumn Statement 2023 tipped to prioritise mental health, in a boost for UK workplaces Aug 29 08:33
- Final reminder for contractors to respond to the umbrella consultation (closing today) Aug 29 08:09
- Top 5 most in demand cyber security contract roles Aug 25 08:38
- Changes to the right to request flexible working are incoming, but how will contractors be affected? Aug 24 08:25
Leave a comment: