Originally posted by SueEllen
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 "Can a security-cleared contract be outside IR35"
Collapse
-
Originally posted by stek View PostSurely if the role is SC then you shouldn't be letting anyone see the contract pertaining to it other than the parties directly named on it?
The actual contract and schedule of work will have insufficient detail in it to be of use to anyone. For example the deliverables in the schedule are written in bog standard language.
In fact most secure and commercially sensitive projects use a code name or acronym to go by.
Leave a comment:
-
Surely if the role is SC then you shouldn't be letting anyone see the contract pertaining to it other than the parties directly named on it?
Leave a comment:
-
Needing SC would not determine you inside of IR35 alone. The need to have SC could make providing a substitute more difficult, but it does not make it unworkable. As previously suggested, engaging a substitute that already holds suitable SC may be enough.
Should a substitute not have relevant SC and the process need to be started from scratch, this may restrict or diminish the right of substitution but it could still be argued that personal service is not required. The likelihood of this happening in practice is low but we need to remember the right of substitution does not need to have been exercised to exist. Therefore these hypothetical situations could form part of an IR35 defence case should the issue of SC be brought up.
Jon
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by VectraMan View PostDoesn't the SC belong to the employer/client and not you personally? So a substitute could never have SC, they'd have to be re-cleared.
For example we needed a specialist to set up some kit over a number of days. Where the kit was meant a full SC was needed to even be in the room. I go to client security controller and say Joe Bloggs is coming to do X. Their clearance is held by ABC. Client controller talks to ABC controller who said they have a valid SC for Joe Bloggs and he comes and does the work.
Same would apply for a substitute.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Churchill View PostSo, don't supply your services to the Public Sector!
Simples!
Given the generous Civil Service pensions, you soft twats should go permy!
Spod - In "supplying military services via a private sector organisation for the past 5 years" mode!
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Acme Thunderer View PostIf the substitute is only there for a short period of time the clearance wouldn't even need to be transferred. As long as the security controller is satisfied the clearance is valid for the time they were on site.
Doesn't the SC belong to the employer/client and not you personally? So a substitute could never have SC, they'd have to be re-cleared.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by northernladuk View Post. You can find some that has SC that's not lapsed and get it transferred or even have your sub put through the whole process. That's the clients problem. You can still exercise the right.
.
For example when I was a permie and worked at another companies site for several months my employer at the time didn't transfer my clearance to the other company.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by malvolio View PostErm... All of mine were...
The clearance rules apply to everyone, regardless of permie or contractor, so how can they be relevant to you being a disguised employee or not? OK, they also apply to your substitute, but that doesn't impact your RoS other than by a totally reasonable requirement that they also be clearable.
From next year though, anyone taking on a PS rile, cleared or not, is going to have a serious problem with IR35. You should be a lot more concerned about that.
Simples!
Given the generous Civil Service pensions, you soft twats should go permy!
Spod - In "supplying military services via a private sector organisation for the past 5 years" mode!
Leave a comment:
-
Erm... All of mine were...
The clearance rules apply to everyone, regardless of permie or contractor, so how can they be relevant to you being a disguised employee or not? OK, they also apply to your substitute, but that doesn't impact your RoS other than by a totally reasonable requirement that they also be clearable.
From next year though, anyone taking on a PS rile, cleared or not, is going to have a serious problem with IR35. You should be a lot more concerned about that.
Leave a comment:
-
I think you can still have the option to provide a substitue. The fact the client has restrictions shouldn't mean you are immediately inside. You can find some that has SC that's not lapsed and get it transferred or even have your sub put through the whole process. That's the clients problem. You can still exercise the right.
I believe if is not tested the defence is that fully expect it to be honoured. If the client turns round and says they wouldn't then you are screwed. Sometimes it's better off not asking.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by OwlHoot View PostSorry to sound thick, but what is due to change in April next year?
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by eek View Post
Until April next year you need one of SDC, substitution or no mutual obligation to be outside ir35. I would guess that a lack of mutual obligation would be the escape route
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by OwlHoot View PostWas talking about this with a someone at clientco earlier, and it seems to me that any security-cleared contractor must be bang-to-rights inside IR35, as they obviously can't claim the right of substitution.
Even in the unlikely event they could claim as a substitute some other contractor, security-cleared to at least the same level, would any organisation demanding security clearance ever consent to a condition like that even in theory?
Or is substitution not always a completely conclusive open-and-shut indicator of being IR35-caught? (I am pretty sure it is.)
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: