• 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!

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 "Contract has been retrospectively declared inside IR35"

Collapse

  • ladymuck
    replied
    Originally posted by eek View Post

    First payment from the end client to the agency, not first client from the agency to the contractor (which may be a factored payment on submission of invoice to end client).
    Ah... yes. Me and my lousy memory.

    Leave a comment:


  • eek
    replied
    Originally posted by ladymuck View Post

    I thought the SDS had to be issued before first payment was made (hence my thoughts around weekly payments) but I had forgotten that a client may change their mind later.

    Good suggestion for Innoaccounts / Offpayroll. If lots of us suggest it to them they may add it?
    First payment from the end client to the agency, not first client from the agency to the contractor (which may be a factored payment on submission of invoice to end client).

    Leave a comment:


  • ladymuck
    replied
    Originally posted by eek View Post

    Weekly payment doesn't solve anything if the end client changes your status 3 months later.

    Likewise an initial SDS statement doesn't help - as that was covered by "the agency appeals the outside SDS statement" scenario HMRC discussed during the workshops.

    Basically accept an outside IR35 role but be careful.

    We really should check if Innoaccounts / Offpayroll have a flag for "determination changed to Inside IR35".
    I thought the SDS had to be issued before first payment was made (hence my thoughts around weekly payments) but I had forgotten that a client may change their mind later.

    Good suggestion for Innoaccounts / Offpayroll. If lots of us suggest it to them they may add it?

    Leave a comment:


  • eek
    replied
    Originally posted by Lance View Post

    Indeed it's not their fault. But if my company has a contract to deliver services to the agency for a fee, and their client changes the terms of payment, it's only the agency my company can pursue for the missing payment.
    It doesn't change the terms of the contract to the intermediary. It does however create a whole pile of additional paperwork that the intermediary now needs to deal with.

    Leave a comment:


  • dsc
    replied
    Originally posted by Lance View Post
    What other recourse options are there for this?
    Sue the agency?
    What's to stop any customer shafting any supplier by simply deciding at the last minute before payment to 'declare it as inside' just to be total arseholes? Could a customer of WiPro for example do this, and if they did what would WiPro's recourse be?

    There is presumably some wording in the legislation that limits when an SDS can even be used. I don't know the legislation very well (at all).
    Exactly this, what if you carry on for 6 months and at the end they say you know what, everything was inside all the time. This is an absolute joke, it's shouldn't be possible to change the determination retrospectively, perhaps then clients would actually give a sh*t about doing it properly.

    Leave a comment:


  • Lance
    replied
    Originally posted by ladymuck View Post

    It's not the agency's fault so you can't sue them.
    Indeed it's not their fault. But if my company has a contract to deliver services to the agency for a fee, and their client changes the terms of payment, it's only the agency my company can pursue for the missing payment.

    Leave a comment:


  • Lance
    replied
    Originally posted by eek View Post

    How would that impact WiPro - it may impact a contractor or 2 that WiPro is using but that would be it.
    That's what I'm trying to understand....
    What's to stop a git in accounts or procurement, for no good reason, deciding at the last minute that a bill to be paid to ANY supplier is now deemed as inside IR35? And therefore having a load of tax removed.
    I don't understand how this whole SDS thing will work in a B2B relationship. I know it shouldn't but what is it in the legislation that makes doing an SDS a thing? And what stops is being applied incorrectly to any supplier?

    I think I might be being really dumb here but I don't understand how this works. My apologies for that.
    Last edited by Lance; 21 July 2021, 13:50.

    Leave a comment:


  • eek
    replied
    Originally posted by ladymuck View Post

    It's not the agency's fault so you can't sue them.

    I think one way to protect yourself is to be very wary of long payment terms and insist on weekly to minimise the risk.

    Also, don't take a gig if the SDS isn't available before you sign the contract but that could be harder to achieve.
    Weekly payment doesn't solve anything if the end client changes your status 3 months later.

    Likewise an initial SDS statement doesn't help - as that was covered by "the agency appeals the outside SDS statement" scenario HMRC discussed during the workshops.

    Basically accept an outside IR35 role but be careful.

    We really should check if Innoaccounts / Offpayroll have a flag for "determination changed to Inside IR35".

    Leave a comment:


  • ladymuck
    replied
    Originally posted by Lance View Post
    What other recourse options are there for this?
    Sue the agency?
    What's to stop any customer shafting any supplier by simply deciding at the last minute before payment to 'declare it as inside' just to be total arseholes? Could a customer of WiPro for example do this, and if they did what would WiPro's recourse be?

    There is presumably some wording in the legislation that limits when an SDS can even be used. I don't know the legislation very well (at all).
    It's not the agency's fault so you can't sue them.

    I think one way to protect yourself is to be very wary of long payment terms and insist on weekly to minimise the risk.

    Also, don't take a gig if the SDS isn't available before you sign the contract but that could be harder to achieve.

    Leave a comment:


  • eek
    replied
    Originally posted by Lance View Post
    What other recourse options are there for this?
    Sue the agency?
    What's to stop any customer shafting any supplier by simply deciding at the last minute before payment to 'declare it as inside' just to be total arseholes? Could a customer of WiPro for example do this, and if they did what would WiPro's recourse be?

    There is presumably some wording in the legislation that limits when an SDS can even be used. I don't know the legislation very well (at all).
    How would that impact WiPro - it may impact a contractor or 2 that WiPro is using but that would be it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Lance
    replied
    What other recourse options are there for this?
    Sue the agency?
    What's to stop any customer shafting any supplier by simply deciding at the last minute before payment to 'declare it as inside' just to be total arseholes? Could a customer of WiPro for example do this, and if they did what would WiPro's recourse be?

    There is presumably some wording in the legislation that limits when an SDS can even be used. I don't know the legislation very well (at all).

    Leave a comment:


  • jamesbrown
    replied
    Originally posted by ladymuck View Post
    Thanks for the update. I think more of this type of scenario needs to come up to show how terrible the guidance is.

    I think it's unreasonable that a client can get several months after engaging resources to decide on what terms those resources are engaged under. I find it very difficult to understand why they don't know what type of resource they need before they go to market.
    Thanks, IPSE.

    Leave a comment:


  • eek
    replied
    Originally posted by ladymuck View Post
    Thanks for the update. I think more of this type of scenario needs to come up to show how terrible the guidance is.

    I think it's unreasonable that a client can get several months after engaging resources to decide on what terms those resources are engaged under. I find it very difficult to understand why they don't know what type of resource they need before they go to market.
    What's wrong with the guidance - the rules are based on points IPSE campaigned for...

    Leave a comment:


  • ladymuck
    replied
    Thanks for the update. I think more of this type of scenario needs to come up to show how terrible the guidance is.

    I think it's unreasonable that a client can get several months after engaging resources to decide on what terms those resources are engaged under. I find it very difficult to understand why they don't know what type of resource they need before they go to market.

    Leave a comment:


  • consultMe
    replied
    Just to provide an update...

    QDOS weren't really able to help further. They said that although they still stand by their determination of 'outside' it is the prerogative of the end client to do what they want up to the point where they have not paid the intermediary. So I'll have to take the 3 months from April as PAYE via an umbrella.

    I've since moved to another outside contract. I've gone through the formality of a QDOS SDS again though now I won't be comfortable until the client has paid the agency invoice, after the quarter is complete I guess.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X