Originally posted by northernladuk
View Post
I think the case you refer to was O'Murphy v HP. However it is important to note that the definition of employee at an ET is different (basically wider) than that relevant to tax legislation. I am not suggesting his case had any merit or otherwise - just that it was under different definitions.
From this very site: http://www.contractoruk.com/news/00455.html
There was also one case (can't find details) where at an employment status investigation a chap - who was arguably part and parcel of a golf club having been there for 20 some odd years - was deemed self employed (under the IR56 tests I think).
Equally there was a case where a golf pro who gave casual lessons etc was determined to be an employee.
So, nothing is certain. Certainly length may be an indication of potential caught, but it is only an indication. Long term business practices can be such that the risk of being caught is much more substantial, but from a commercial point of view is it not sensible to try and cultivate those relationships in a long term manner?
If somebody is worried that they may be caught because of duration that is mainly a reflection on the way way they choose to conduct their business.
Leave a comment: