Reply to: Inside IR35 contracts with 2/3 days on site for travelling contractors

[fatJock]

One thing I never see in these threads - have you not negotiated to make your expenses rechargeable? It wouldn't matter that you can't claim them from your Ltd then.

You do know you can negotiate, right?

What I have done in the one inside role I had. Contract amended to state that base was home address - all travel to sites other than home could be expensed (as client agreed policy) via agency and umbrella. Same with any required overnight stays (weren’t any for me but there were for others).

These I believe fall under allowances for legitimate chargeable expenses but of course limit those that could be claimed operating outside.

[hugebrain]

Because he is an employee and you aren't. You quote a line to help your argument but completely ignore the key point. An infosys employee on a fix price contract couldn't be any more different than a contractor inside IR35. You clearly have no idea how infosys the company operate and are just focusing on irrelevant points to try make a case.

I’ve had the pleasure of working alongside Infosys for many years and know exactly how they operate.

They have two advantages - their employees hate Indians and are desperate to get away from them so will work for very little - they can spend on travel etc. before tax.

There’s not much I can do about the first advantage. I’ve always taken outside IR 35 contracts to negate the second.

I’m pleased you think I couldn’t be any more different to the Infosys guys. Nicest thing you have ever said!

[northernladuk]

That’s exactly what I was pointing out

As I understand it, if I am working on an assignment at a client and an Infosys guy is working on the next desk. He will be able to pay his hotel and travel expenses from pre-tax money and I won’t. Meaning that my expenses are three or four times higher than his.

Which is why the consultancies paid for IR35 in the first place.

Because he is an employee and you aren't. You quote a line to help your argument but completely ignore the key point. An infosys employee on a fix price contract couldn't be any more different than a contractor inside IR35. You clearly have no idea how infosys the company operate and are just focusing on irrelevant points to try make a case.

[hugebrain]

Just becase an employee can do something it doesn't mean someone inside can.

That’s exactly what I was pointing out

As I understand it, if I am working on an assignment at a client and an Infosys guy is working on the next desk. He will be able to pay his hotel and travel expenses from pre-tax money and I won’t. Meaning that my expenses are three or four times higher than his.

Which is why the consultancies paid for IR35 in the first place.

[northernladuk]

I thought the point was that a typical Infosys employee can claim expenses, but a typical contractor can’t. Otherwise what is the point of IR35?

You are comparing apples and pears. IR35 is a tax status, it's nothing to do with employment. And inside contractor maybe tax 'like' and employee but that's it. There are no benefits or rights crossover. The infosys person can claim expenses because of the policy of his employer, an inside contractor does not have an employer. Well actually they do and it's the umbrella who says no expenses.

Just becase an employee can do something it doesn't mean someone inside can. Got to be very clear on the differences to understand the nuances.

[hugebrain]

How would that solve anything.

only expenses that a typical employee would receive are allowed if you are in IR35.

a regular weekly journey to an the company’s main location does not qualify as an expensible journey for an employee so tax would be due on the payment - we have seen this multiple times in the past.

as I’ve pointed out before the only workaround here is if the client pays for the hotel and train fare directly.

I thought the point was that a typical Infosys employee can claim expenses, but a typical contractor can’t. Otherwise what is the point of IR35?

[northernladuk]

One thing I never see in these threads - have you not negotiated to make your expenses rechargeable? It wouldn't matter that you can't claim them from your Ltd then.

You do know you can negotiate, right?

But why should they when the model they are using is to pay a fixed fee for a contractor via an agency and not dick about with using internal resources up messing with expenses. Many other suppliers swallow a portion of expenses in the rate so why not expect the same from the contractor. The last three gigs I've been in spanning nearly five years were no expenses for contractors. The rates have been a little better than average so fair enough. In fact bloody great as we went in to lockdown and incurred absolutely zero expenses for nearly three years. I've saved more with that than I'll lose paying my own expenses for the odd travel and overnight for years so on balance I'm actually up.

It does depend on situation though. If you talk about hybrid working and travel to client site then no way will you get that and you shouldn't be asking IMO. And what Eek says. If there is going to be considerable travel to a different site or something then you weigh up how much you are willing to swallow, what the rate is via market rates and then mention it to the client if it's excessive. But in most cases negotiating fair irrelevant expenses for a general gig is not good sense.

[eek]

One thing I never see in these threads - have you not negotiated to make your expenses rechargeable? It wouldn't matter that you can't claim them from your Ltd then.

You do know you can negotiate, right?

How would that solve anything.

only expenses that a typical employee would receive are allowed if you are in IR35.

a regular weekly journey to an the company’s main location does not qualify as an expensible journey for an employee so tax would be due on the payment - we have seen this multiple times in the past.

as I’ve pointed out before the only workaround here is if the client pays for the hotel and train fare directly.

[PerfectStorm]

One thing I never see in these threads - have you not negotiated to make your expenses rechargeable? It wouldn't matter that you can't claim them from your Ltd then.

You do know you can negotiate, right?

[hugebrain]

If you want London money you could suck up the cost of living close to London.

To be fair they’ve thought about this too. That’s what all this double/triple council tax for “second homes” push is about they don’t want anybody to be able to rent somewhere close to where they work either.

[northernladuk]

Alas the forum is full of complete tossers who wouldn't say it your face in the street because they'd get a beating. Instead they're keyboard warriors who get a stiffy because they can abuse strangers on the internet.

I can guarantee 99% of the people wouldn't say the stuff they say on here to my face when they saw me.

Remember the film 40 year old virgin - thats what I imagine most of the participants on this forum are like.

Says the person that can't post a single thing in prof forums without having it locked and still hasn't sussed out what the problem is.

[psychocandy]

And that, in a nutshell, are the CUK forums.

qh

Alas the forum is full of complete tossers who wouldn't say it your face in the street because they'd get a beating. Instead they're keyboard warriors who get a stiffy because they can abuse strangers on the internet.

I can guarantee 99% of the people wouldn't say the stuff they say on here to my face when they saw me.

Remember the film 40 year old virgin - thats what I imagine most of the participants on this forum are like.

[JohnM]

Are you new here? We’re all rude, pretentious, insufferable know-it-alls

[northernladuk]

And that, in a nutshell, are any online forums ever.

qh

FTFY

[quackhandle]

there are some good points in there you might want to consider. Just have to filter out the rude bits.

And that, in a nutshell, are the CUK forums.

qh