Reply to: Its fine roll it out to the private sector.

[m0n1k3r]

Excellent. Some sense st last.

Pay tax as a self-employed person? That clashes with:

https://www.gov.uk/working-for-yourself

"... if you own a limited company ... you’re not classed as self-employed by HMRC. Instead you’re both an owner and employee of your company."

[MrMarkyMark]

Oh, I see. Dunno then.

Guess you might find out soon, you were one of the first to get the "error"



I'm here for you brother

[barrydidit]

I meant it could mean something to HMRC


Or am I getting paranoid

Oh, I see. Dunno then.

Strange how paranoia can link up with reality now and then.

[MrMarkyMark]

It meant cut and paste the URL from Chrome into Edge, get a different style of fail, swear, cut and paste URL into IE, press F5 a couple of times and away you go!

I meant it could mean something to HMRC


Or am I getting paranoid

[barrydidit]

Already identified by barrydiit on here.

What could it mean

It meant cut and paste the URL from Chrome into Edge, get a different style of fail, swear, cut and paste URL into IE, press F5 a couple of times and away you go!

[MPwannadecentincome]

There were some fairly significant updates between the beta that was running yesterday and the live version today. If anything, the beta version was too lax – i.e. you were outside with no substitution or control if you had financial risk.

They’ve obviously tightened it up ....

and they can continue to tighten up until they hit the 90% target....

[MrMarkyMark]

All I get from HMRCs shiny new tool is:

"Bad CSRF token found in query String"

Perhaps they should have hired some decent contractors to implement it? Splendid job...

Already identified by barrydiit on here.

What could it mean

[seeourbee]

I don't think post is the most helpful.

I agree that the Royal Mail doesn't contribute much here

[northernladuk]

Surprised at all this fine tuning discussion (or perhaps you're just exhausting every permutation?) but I think this guy on LinkedIn summed it up well:



Basically it should be relatively straightforward to be outside (if you are a genuine contractor). Your agent should be having those 'directing' conversations with the end client. If your agent isn't doing that then you've got a terrible contact. You need to surround yourself with talented people, one of the rules of business.

To be honest, just reading that, it would have put every one of the PM's inside at my last gig.

• They are just flex to an existing delivery unit.
• Very unlikely they'd allow a sub midway through a project. They'd just give it to one of the other PM's
• It has outputs but that is the style of PM'ing. The person was brought in to be a PM on a project. Not the best evidence of a role based gig, particularly when every single PM there had delivered more than one project so are clearly the first item. Any wording around to deliver <x> project is just a paperwork exercise.

Technically it might be correct but the reality is often far from that however much we kid ourselves. 2 years PM'ing in a PS destroys all of those so time now becomes an issue where it wasn't before. I don't think that post is the most helpful.

[willendure]

All I get from HMRCs shiny new tool is:

"Bad CSRF token found in query String"

Perhaps they should have hired some decent contractors to implement it? Splendid job...

Inspect -> Application -> Clear Storage sorts the problem. Must be an old cookie hanging around causing the problem.

[sal]

All I get from HMRCs shiny new tool is:

"Bad CSRF token found in query String"

Perhaps they should have hired some decent contractors to implement it? Splendid job...

Not trying to defend HMRC etc. but, try using different browser and remember it's still beta

[willendure]

All I get from HMRCs shiny new tool is:

"Bad CSRF token found in query String"

Perhaps they should have hired some decent contractors to implement it? Splendid job...

[NewDan]

Something isn't right

[jamesbrown]

In the beta it was very difficult to get an indeterminate result; now that seems to be common if there is no substitution. For all HMRC’s focus on "SDC" in other legislations, I find it somewhat surprising that it is given far less credence than personal service in the ESS. In case law they hold equal importance.

Seb

Yes, that's exactly my experience, having tested both versions. The crux of the change in D&C is the weighting of the "how" element of control when the client requires specialist expertise. This is a very difficult question to answer correctly, and is addressed in Marlen and Primary Path, among others. It's going to lead to a neutral determination on D&C in many cases and hence the need for a RoS that doesn't really stack-up against the case law RoS. Bottom line, the final tool has some problems, even if it only leads to an indeterminate result.

[seeourbee]

So Cap Gemini were behind this release were they ...?