Confirmed OUTSIDE whilst working for government department

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!

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.

DeludedKitten replied

3 October 2018, 08:50
Originally posted by Hobosapien View Post

Also print out any legally binding HMRC promise to stand by CEST and not go after the contractor if the client messes it up.

It's not a promise from HMRC. It's the legislation.
Leave a comment:
Hobosapien replied

2 October 2018, 12:48
Fair do's.

OP make sure you keep the proof from the client safe in case HMRC tweak the CEST so the result appears different with the same or similar inputs.

Also print out any legally binding HMRC promise to stand by CEST and not go after the contractor if the client messes it up. Then you can tell them to retrospectively shove it if they change tack in the near future.
Leave a comment:
WordIsBond replied

2 October 2018, 09:44
Originally posted by DeludedKitten View Post

Just make sure there is nothing in the contract that allows them to pass those on to you - my gut instinct is that this would not be legal anyway, but it would be a fight that you won't want to have just to prove it.

This is the only thing OP needs to worry about, and as noted, it probably wouldn't be legal anyway.
Leave a comment:
WordIsBond replied

2 October 2018, 09:43
Originally posted by Hobosapien View Post

I'd still get the working practices documented and reviewed along with the contract by a reputable review service as a way of taking personal responsibility in case HMRC or client backtrack somehow in the future, just for more peace of mind that you've done about as much as you can to protect yourself.

I wouldn't. OP has zero liability in this case, and I would not advise him to spend the money.

HMRC is not going to go after individual contractors in this scenario. They are going to go after private sector contractors (at least until the rules change), if they go after individual contractors.

But their whole agenda is to avoid having to go after individual contractors. If they go after this case, it will be with the agenda of making an example of the client. They want clients to rule contractors inside, and they will be out to punish a client who didn't do that if they think the client was wrong. OP is no longer their concern.
Leave a comment:
Hobosapien replied

2 October 2018, 08:42
I'd still get the working practices documented and reviewed along with the contract by a reputable review service as a way of taking personal responsibility in case HMRC or client backtrack somehow in the future, just for more peace of mind that you've done about as much as you can to protect yourself.

Then you just need to maintain the working practices that keep you outside.
Leave a comment:
DeludedKitten replied

1 October 2018, 16:04
Originally posted by boxingbantz View Post

My client have confirmed I am working outside of IR35 and have provided me with the results of the tool that they used to obtain this result.

With this in mind, if any investigations took place, is it fair to say that I would have no financial liability IF HMRC they decided the result was incorrect?

My working practices are outside of IR35, to be honest, but just curious as to how much weight the results of the tests have.

HMRC have said that they will stand by any outcome from their CEST tool.

However, since the fee payer is making the judgement then it doesn't matter what they use - they are liable for getting the judgement correct, and are liable for any penalties and taxes that become due.

Just make sure there is nothing in the contract that allows them to pass those on to you - my gut instinct is that this would not be legal anyway, but it would be a fight that you won't want to have just to prove it.
Leave a comment:
Lance replied

1 October 2018, 16:02
Originally posted by boxingbantz View Post

My client have confirmed I am working outside of IR35 and have provided me with the results of the tool that they used to obtain this result.

With this in mind, if any investigations took place, is it fair to say that I would have no financial liability IF HMRC they decided the result was incorrect?

My working practices are outside of IR35, to be honest, but just curious as to how much weight the results of the tests have.

Which tool did they use?
If they used the CEST tool them HMRC have stated that they'll standby the result assuming that genuine working practises have been input.
Leave a comment:
boxingbantz started a topic Confirmed OUTSIDE whilst working for government department

1 October 2018, 15:41
Confirmed OUTSIDE whilst working for government department

My client have confirmed I am working outside of IR35 and have provided me with the results of the tool that they used to obtain this result.

With this in mind, if any investigations took place, is it fair to say that I would have no financial liability IF HMRC they decided the result was incorrect?

My working practices are outside of IR35, to be honest, but just curious as to how much weight the results of the tests have.
Tags: None