Originally posted by NCOTBAC
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 "Private sector reform planning - should we use CEST yet?"
Collapse
-
Originally posted by headsy View PostLooks like HMRC aren't even going to use it....Last edited by Contractor UK; 14 December 2019, 21:55.
Leave a comment:
-
Looks like HMRC aren't even going to use it....Last edited by Contractor UK; 14 December 2019, 21:55.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by northernladuk View PostNo so sure about that. I'd be thinking more along the lines these are businesses and doing a freebie coordinated with their competitors isn't as high on their agenda as we think it could be.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by JohntheBike View Postwell, could it be that some organisations have a covert agenda and don't want to upset HMG?
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by northernladuk View PostAnd someone should be asking why not IMO.
And it shouldn't be unreasonable to expect the paid for services to pen a similar letter en masse I would have thought. QDOS, B&C and so on.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by JohntheBike View Post"the comment about IPSE not really delivering what people expect is true"
I see IPSE isn't included in this list -
Open letter to Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt, by 10 contractor organisations
And it shouldn't be unreasonable to expect the paid for services to pen a similar letter en masse I would have thought. QDOS, B&C and so on.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by northernladuk View PostFeel free to relate to a comment made over 20 years ago about legislation no one understood. I'm sure it will stand you in good stead.
It's unlikely QDOS or similar organisations will be releasing any names as they will be looking to get business out of these clients. It would be a really bad move for them to start telling the competition who they are dealing with and level of engagement. As I said, they aren't doing it for free.
But it's still a year away and most are still in information gathering. What policies private sector clients want to put in place is their business really. We are just suppliers at the end of the day. I can't see why they would be making their engagement policies public, particularly this early on.
I very much doubt that is the case and will be a nightmare for the rest of us. As I said in a previous post, get the wrong person in that doesn't have a clue and it's going to end up worse not better.
I think a vast majority of us thinks that but I don't think many will bother making useless comparisons like that. They are two completely different beasts, created for different reasons and with different aims.
Pointless comparison but the comment about IPSE not really delivering what people expect is true.
I see IPSE isn't included in this list -
Open letter to Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt, by 10 contractor organisations
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by northernladuk View PostWhen the article says 8 of 10 will challenge it, it means they will complain to their client and will be told to get back in their box or leave to which they will do the former... exactly as happened in the public sector. Tons of bluff and bluster amounting to zero.
I doubt anyone will be taking anything to ET for awhile, after all, like in the Winchester case, it's back payments of which there will be none from day one. It will be interesting to see what happens a year or so down the line though for sure.. The Winchester case has hardly started a deluge of claims and shouldn't be too difficult to sort something to avoid this situation.
It's the 2 out of 10 that will influence the situation.
"The Winchester case has hardly started a deluge of claims"
not yet
"shouldn't be too difficult to sort something to avoid this situation"
exactly, and that situation should mean a contract and assessment which is outside of IR35. Glad you see the value of the tactic now.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by JohntheBike View Post
It's clearly of no consequence to me that until recently, no one else? has adopted this approach, but given that these articles intimate that many will fight any unjust status assessment, perhaps we will see more of this approach, i.e. using the ET to correctly determine employment status.
I doubt anyone will be taking anything to ET for awhile, after all, like in the Winchester case, it's back payments of which there will be none from day one. It will be interesting to see what happens a year or so down the line though for sure.. The Winchester case has hardly started a deluge of claims and shouldn't be too difficult to sort something to avoid this situation.Last edited by northernladuk; 24 June 2019, 14:21.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by northernladuk View PostAgain with the useless points about something that happened 20 years ago in a completely different situation. It's ancient history. If you want to make comparisons at least use the Public Sector roll out for your comparisons.
To be totally honest I don't really see why they should at the point, beyond a vague communication that they are aware and looking in to it I guess. Maybe out of fact finding to see what the general feeling about how many might leave and how many might not but this early in the day when making high level policy decisions I don't really see the need to discuss it with contractors individually. If the plan is to try keep the existing people over a year later you could argue there is already and Ir35 issue with the client seeing them as part and parcel.
If a client is looking at an exercise to consolidate all their individual suppliers in to a single offering they don't go discussing it with all those small suppliers until they've made a decision.
Because last time you did that it didn't end very well did it.
If memory serves me right they delayed the public sector implementation once and then it hit. They've already moved the date a year for the private sector so comparing like for like then I wouldn't be betting on a delay. The only hope would be the private sector make a concerted effort to push harder than the Public Sector but as you've pointed out that doesn't seem to be happening.
It most certainly did and from my personal point of view, it was very profitable, given that it cost me about £8000 and I was faced with an approx. £12000 pa increase in taxation under IR35, which would now have amounted to a huge amount. Money well spent I'd say.
It's clearly of no consequence to me that until recently, no one else? has adopted this approach, but given that these articles intimate that many will fight any unjust status assessment, perhaps we will see more of this approach, i.e. using the ET to correctly determine employment status.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by JohntheBike View Postyes, this info is useful.
" I don't see all that many contractors that have taken enough of an interest in what's happening let alone but up a reasonable argument if and when it happens"
it would appear so. When IR35 was first introduced, some of my colleagues succumbed to the bullying aspect of the rules and paid up immediately. Many years later, I worked right next to another contractor, working in the same way on the same application and he was also paying up. His accountant had persuaded him to do so, to avoid any unnecessary scrutiny of his relationship with his other clients.
It's interesting to note the high percentage of contractors who indicate that their client/agency hasn't contacted them to discuss the issues. Mine haven't either.
If a client is looking at an exercise to consolidate all their individual suppliers in to a single offering they don't go discussing it with all those small suppliers until they've made a decision.
However, I'm keeping my powder dry until or if I need to use it and I don't want to jeopardise my lucrative position until or if I really have to.
There is pressure to delay the rules even further, so they may not affect me at all.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by northernladuk View PostAnd I assume this is the type of thing you mean? Hays have put an article up on here.
Public sector IR35 reform lessons are being learnt – at least by contractors' clients
And QDOS might not be releasing their client list, they are writing about the situation out there.
Contractors, is your client one of the few ahead of the IR35 reform game?
Although it's going to be interesting when this happens.
Bar many people on here, I don't see all that many contractors that have taken enough of an interest in what's happening let alone but up a reasonable argument if and when it happens. Maybe, like the PS carry on, the meerkat contractors will pop up a few months before it hits.
" I don't see all that many contractors that have taken enough of an interest in what's happening let alone but up a reasonable argument if and when it happens"
it would appear so. When IR35 was first introduced, some of my colleagues succumbed to the bullying aspect of the rules and paid up immediately. Many years later, I worked right next to another contractor, working in the same way on the same application and he was also paying up. His accountant had persuaded him to do so, to avoid any unnecessary scrutiny of his relationship with his other clients.
It's interesting to note the high percentage of contractors who indicate that their client/agency hasn't contacted them to discuss the issues. Mine haven't either. However, I'm keeping my powder dry until or if I need to use it and I don't want to jeopardise my lucrative position until or if I really have to. There is pressure to delay the rules even further, so they may not affect me at all.
Leave a comment:
-
And I assume this is the type of thing you mean? Hays have put an article up on here.
Public sector IR35 reform lessons are being learnt – at least by contractors' clients
And QDOS might not be releasing their client list, they are writing about the situation out there.
Contractors, is your client one of the few ahead of the IR35 reform game?
Although it's going to be interesting when this happens.
But if fairness gets flouted, and contractors feel they have been incorrectly placed inside IR35, the overwhelming majority will challenge this decision. Specifically, more than eight in 10 limited company contractors said they would put up a fight, not simply walk away from their contract.Last edited by northernladuk; 24 June 2019, 09:56.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by JohntheBike View PostBy useful, I mean to the wider community. I have no idea what the position is of any of the major players in the contracting environment. I can only relate the statement that Hewlett Packard made when IR35 was introduced, and that was "no changes to contractor terms and conditions as a result of IR35"
It's unlikely QDOS or similar organisations will be releasing any names as they will be looking to get business out of these clients. It would be a really bad move for them to start telling the competition who they are dealing with and level of engagement. As I said, they aren't doing it for free.
If an organisation has a vested interest in any issues, then I would have thought that they would use funds to establish the implications to them of those issues, even if a wider audience was also able to benefit from that approach.
It seems to me to be that it will be down once again to what individuals will be able to make of their own personal situation, rather than what contractor "representative" organisations are willing to get engaged in.
I'm a member of IPSE, now mainly for the financial benefits it accrues, but I don't think that organisations necessarily represents my needs or aspirations.
I liken it to my membership of the Jaguar Drivers Club. I pay my subs in order to benefit from competitive insurance for my classic Jaguar and some general information regarding the classic movement as a whole. However, it's a club which seems mainly orientated towards social events, and I'm more interested in practical issues such as maintenance and restoration.
Pointless comparison but the comment about IPSE not really delivering what people expect is true.
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: