Reply to: Agent asking for NI number before next payment

[SneakySimon]

Dodgy Payments

I love how people always fail to see the other side:-

The problem this is designed to solve for HMRC is agencies are paying people by dodgy means...

So they ask agencies to report how they pay all the people who work through them... We are people and work through them so they have to report the amount of money they pay us...

If you don't like it there are really only 3 options:-

1. Go perm
2. Go direct
3. Move up the food chain and become a proper consultancy

Been looking into this today as agency has finally caught on and asked for my details. Being an inquisitive type, I was trying to work out how they could use the data since the quarters don't align to my companies year end / VAT reporting and my salary / div have no baring on the amount I am paid from the agency (ie I pay myself 10k salary, 30k divi regardless of whether I earn 150k, 100k, 50k. Useful for HMRC in case of investigation but day to day, I can't really see a use aside from identifying the dodgy payments and maybe EBT's (if that is not what your referring to with 'dodgy agency payments'.

[Batcher]

Sure it does.

Ok, it gives me a bit more notice of where I'm working but essentially that is the way it works.

[PerfectStorm]

I've not supplied mine. I'll fight it to the end.

The end = 5pm on April 5th?

[d000hg]

I'm an employee / worker for a Ltd that I happen to be a shareholder of. My Ltd tends to win contracts via agencies (in the main) and then tells me where I need to go to work that day to earn my salary.

Sure it does.

[FatLazyContractor]

Haven't yet. I am having a war with the agency. They tried their old chestnut of stopping payments and I replied to them saying 'Try it. Good luck.'.

My contract finishes on 17th April and I am opted in. So far they haven't stopped my payments (received one payment today).

Their obligation is not my arse wipe after all. If it comes down to the wire, I will think about it.

If they want a fight, I am happy to give it to them the good old Northern way.

[northernladuk]

So forum regulars - have you supplied your NI details, or are you planning to refuse (or already have done)?

I've not supplied mine. I'll fight it to the end.

[Batcher]

So forum regulars - have you supplied your NI details, or are you planning to refuse (or already have done)?

I've supplied mine. Don't see the big deal TBH.

[PerfectStorm]

So forum regulars - have you supplied your NI details, or are you planning to refuse (or already have done)?

[MicrosoftBob]

HMRC can't afford to take contractors on who have tax insurance.

Which is a small minority, and they can afford to take them on even though they usually lose, it's their lack of accountability that makes them carry on

And partly because IR35 was introduced out of spite, rather than for any economical reasons

[SueEllen]

HSBC can afford to take HMRC on, individual contractors often can't, HMRC go for the low hanging fruit everytime

HMRC can't afford to take contractors on who have tax insurance.

[Unix]

Did you opt out of the 2 year rule as well?

You tell me

[MicrosoftBob]

But the implication is that you will automatically considered as a "worker" under the control of your "employer". IR35 will automatically apply.

If HMRC are tightening up to stop people cheating the system, then start with HSBC and not with tax paying contractors outside IR35.

HSBC can afford to take HMRC on, individual contractors often can't, HMRC go for the low hanging fruit everytime

[northernladuk]

Rather than just posting stupid sentences explain how getting your contract reviewed and changed so you are less likely to be investigated/caught by the IR35 is not avoiding it?

Did you opt out of the 2 year rule as well?

[TheFaQQer]

Hmm, shouldn't that be: No, Yes, Yes. ?

linky

I'll take the correction for the first but not the last.

If I engage a supplier, then I won't provide the information - for example, if I engage Microsoft to provide services then I won't have all their details. So if I subcontract an individual, then I would provide the details; if I purchase services from a limited company then I wouldn't need to do it.

[Paddy]

I'm an employee / worker for a Ltd that I happen to be a shareholder of. My Ltd tends to win contracts via agencies (in the main) and then tells me where I need to go to work that day to earn my salary.

HMRC are tightening up to stop people cheating the system. If you operate correctly you have nothing to fear.

But the implication is that you will automatically considered as a "worker" under the control of your "employer". IR35 will automatically apply.

If HMRC are tightening up to stop people cheating the system, then start with HSBC and not with tax paying contractors outside IR35.