Originally posted by northernladuk
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!
Reply to: Accountingweb IR35 article for clients
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 "Accountingweb IR35 article for clients"
Collapse
-
-
Originally posted by JohntheBike View PostI guess you haven't been around here long enough to remember my posts under a different pseudonym.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by northernladuk View PostThat's probably because your situation didn't play out like a slow motion car crash on this fora. I'm sure you'd have come out much worse on here.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by JohntheBike View Postwell, all I can say is that there is far more information being disseminated here and not all over there or here are against me. However, over there is a has been for me.
edit
and it would appear that over there is also a has been for others here
and just to set the record straight, some officials over there have acted towards me in a somewhat less professional way than that organisation's title would suggest.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by malvolio View PostThe same points and criticisms were made over there as well...
edit
and it would appear that over there is also a has been for others here
and just to set the record straight, some officials over there have acted towards me in a somewhat less professional way than that organisation's title would suggest.Last edited by JohntheBike; 31 May 2019, 09:19.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by northernladuk View PostDunno about guess. Looks pretty black and white to me.
You assumption about the software house more likely to determine you are outside is seriously flawed though. What's the perm to contractor split in what you are doing? That many contractors in a smallish operation sounds top heavy and you being there for 2 years as well. On that information alone it sounds like are using the contractors as flexible perms. Part and parcel is also a problem on longer gigs.
Again there isn't enough information about the size of said software house but if its small to mid they may not have the knowledge or money to spend on IR35 consultants to help them with their determination and could opt to swap a good number of contractors to inside or offer perm than run the risk of the unknown.
Contract might be outside but working practices can trump that.
If the roll out goes anything like the PS one then a lot of clients will be erring on the side of caution and it will take time for outside gigs to start coming out.
Size of client, contract to perm ratios, attidue to risk and so many more variables will come in to play so wouldn't assume you're safe until you are given an outside contract on April the 6th.
"You assumption about the software house more likely to determine you are outside is seriously flawed though"
I'm not assuming that. I'm actually assuming the opposite. However, what I'm intimating is that it is more likely I'll be able to negotiate with the software house than the end client, because my contract is with the software house. If they won't negotiate, I'll retire as I'll be 72 by then. However, given what the end client has advised me, they may not be happy with the software house if this happens. There have been incidents in the past when the end client has over ruled the software house with regards to my position.
"What's the perm to contractor split in what you are doing?"
I have two permanent understudies in India. So three in total.
"you being there for 2 years as well"
I've been with the end client for almost 19 years. I'm an old mainframe dinosaur. But then crocs and gators have been very successful also!
"Contract might be outside but working practices can trump that."
yes, I'm very well aware of that. Remember I've been to the EAT.
Supervison - I work exclusively from home and rarely go on site, so no one directly supervises me in person or remotely
Direction - no one directs what I do because my knowledge of the application I support is extensive and only I have been able to determine how to fix some very serious issues in the past. I've also done this for other applications not under my control when requested by the client.
Control - no one controls what I do. If there is an issue, I alone decide what is necessary to recover the situation.
"so wouldn't assume you're safe until you are given an outside contract on April the 6th"
I've had my contract professionally assessed by Abbey Tax and they have judged it outside. I also have case law in my favour, which as I've already advised, warned off HMRC when they came after me in 2000.
In any event, as I've said, if I am still in contract in April 2020 and what I'm offered doesn't suit me, I'll just retire. I really don't want to fight the system anymore. However, I've just beaten an agent of HMRC in court for charging an incorrect VAT amount on an import. They now have a CCJ against them, with whatever consequences that has for that business. They only paid up when confronted with the bailiffs. So I'm not averse to a fight if necessary.
Leave a comment:
-
Dunno about guess. Looks pretty black and white to me.
You assumption about the software house more likely to determine you are outside is seriously flawed though. What's the perm to contractor split in what you are doing? That many contractors in a smallish operation sounds top heavy and you being there for 2 years as well. On that information alone it sounds like are using the contractors as flexible perms. Part and parcel is also a problem on longer gigs.
Again there isn't enough information about the size of said software house but if its small to mid they may not have the knowledge or money to spend on IR35 consultants to help them with their determination and could opt to swap a good number of contractors to inside or offer perm than run the risk of the unknown.
Contract might be outside but working practices can trump that.
If the roll out goes anything like the PS one then a lot of clients will be erring on the side of caution and it will take time for outside gigs to start coming out.
Size of client, contract to perm ratios, attidue to risk and so many more variables will come in to play so wouldn't assume you're safe until you are given an outside contract on April the 6th.Last edited by northernladuk; 30 May 2019, 17:16.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by northernladuk View PostThe complication came with the fact a private company provides to PS therefore do the PS rules apply. Now it's everyone it won't really matter. The only slight issue could be if you are just body shopped on to your clients client site but that's pretty rare so I guess the determination will be who pays you and you do work for. I don't think they'll be as caught up in the client of your client as they were before so most likely going to stop with who you contract for.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by JohntheBike View Post"A fully managed service at X cost that covers all the man hours, admin, hardware, whatever. The client of your client just sees a figure and a service"
There have been issues which tend to indicate to me that this is the relationship between the software house and the end client. However, it remains to be seen what will happen from next April.
and thanks for the clarification.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by northernladuk View PostNo. This.
The answer to this is in the paragraph I pasted above.
"The only way to be exempt is to provide a service not people"
A fully managed service at X cost that covers all the man hours, admin, hardware, whatever. The client of your client just sees a figure and a service. They don't care about how it's provided.
You provide a daily rate for a bum on seat providing personal service.
"A fully managed service at X cost that covers all the man hours, admin, hardware, whatever. The client of your client just sees a figure and a service"
There have been issues which tend to indicate to me that this is the relationship between the software house and the end client. However, it remains to be seen what will happen from next April.
and thanks for the clarification.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by JohntheBike View Post"2nd paragraph in case you are struggling" if this is the statement you are referring to -
The current public sector IR35 rules include a fully contracted-out service exception and this exception is expected to form part of the private sector IR35 rules from 6 April 2020.
he original IR35 rules were introduced with effect from 6 April 2000 and can apply where an individual (a worker) personally provides their services through an intermediary to an end-user. The intermediary is commonly the worker’s personal service company. The use of the term worker here does not mean they have statutory “worker” status for employment rights purposes.then I could contend that is the case in my current setup. All IT support functions are provided by the software house. But I guess it isn't at all clear yet if the end client will be exempt from applying the rules.
"The only way to be exempt is to provide a service not people"
So how can any service be provided without people? Would a contracted out service mean that the contract between the end client and the software house would not name any individual? So if that contract did name an individual, this wouldn't be classed as a contracted out service? Would this be the deciding factor?
You provide a daily rate for a bum on seat providing personal service.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by northernladuk View PostThe article you linked in your first post answers your question. 2nd paragraph in case you are struggling.
The pertinent reading is on the 2nd page in the sticky I linked. A link to an article from Kate Cottrell covers the scenario for Public sector clients/consultancies but this is largely irrelevant now as it was confusing the distinction between a public sector client or a private sector client so isn't confusing anymore. So your question about examples of PS via consultancies doesn't work. The private client is now caught so doesn't matter if the end client is public or private anymore. Revert back to the 2nd paragraph of your link
IR35 reforms: Where consultancies are caught
The article you linked in your first post answers your question
The only way to be exempt is to provide a service not people.
P.S. When they talk about intermediaries here they are not talking agencies. Again, explained in the 2nd paragraph of your own article.
P.S.S Don't get the end user of the chain mixed up with who is paying for and consuming your services. It should be a lot clearer if you get that right first. It was an issue back in PS days but not now.
The current public sector IR35 rules include a fully contracted-out service exception and this exception is expected to form part of the private sector IR35 rules from 6 April 2020.
then I could contend that is the case in my current setup. All IT support functions are provided by the software house. But I guess it isn't at all clear yet if the end client will be exempt from applying the rules.
"The only way to be exempt is to provide a service not people"
So how can any service be provided without people? Would a contracted out service mean that the contract between the end client and the software house would not name any individual? So if that contract did name an individual, this wouldn't be classed as a contracted out service? Would this be the deciding factor?
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by JohntheBike View PostSo let's take a specific historical example. Computer Sciences Corporation used to provide IT support in a number of areas for MG Rover. They did this by using a mixture of permanent employees and contractors. The employees tended to be managing teams of contractors. How would this structure have fared under the new rules?
Do we have examples of public sector clients using software houses who are exempt and where the software house is applying the rules?
IR35 reforms: Where consultancies are caught
edit
Some CSC contractors provided their services to MG Rover from CSC premises and through an agency. I currently supply my services through a software house to a client and do not reside at the client's site. Additionally there is no intermediate agency. So how would that structure likely fare under the new rules?
The only way to be exempt is to provide a service not people.
P.S. When they talk about intermediaries here they are not talking agencies. Again, explained in the 2nd paragraph of your own article.
P.S.S Don't get the end user of the chain mixed up with who is paying for and consuming your services. It should be a lot clearer if you get that right first. It was an issue back in PS days but not now.Last edited by northernladuk; 30 May 2019, 12:32.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Qdos Contractor View PostIn theory yes, providing the services are genuinely outsourced and managed by the software house. It's part of the reason why there has been a recent push towards Statement of Work type arrangements.
It was very prevalent in the public sector and there is HMRC guidance here.
Do we have examples of public sector clients using software houses who are exempt and where the software house is applying the rules?
edit
Some CSC contractors provided their services to MG Rover from CSC premises and through an agency. I currently supply my services through a software house to a client and do not reside at the client's site. Additionally there is no intermediate agency. So how would that structure likely fare under the new rules?Last edited by JohntheBike; 30 May 2019, 12:07.
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
- The truth of umbrella company regulation is being misconstrued Today 09:23
- Labour’s plan to regulate umbrella companies: a closer look Nov 21 09:24
- When HMRC misses an FTT deadline but still wins another CJRS case Nov 20 09:20
- How 15% employer NICs will sting the umbrella company market Nov 19 09:16
- Contracting Awards 2024 hails 19 firms as best of the best Nov 18 09:13
- How to answer at interview, ‘What’s your greatest weakness?’ Nov 14 09:59
- Business Asset Disposal Relief changes in April 2025: Q&A Nov 13 09:37
- How debt transfer rules will hit umbrella companies in 2026 Nov 12 09:28
- IT contractor demand floundering despite Autumn Budget 2024 Nov 11 09:30
- An IR35 bill of £19m for National Resources Wales may be just the tip of its iceberg Nov 7 09:20
Leave a comment: