Reply to: Dilemma

[CompoundOverload]

That isn’t an issue to me. If you have a review and your working practices match the outside assessment then you can provide evidence that your assessment is correct. So if you leave they have nothing to say that the new engagement is the same.

And at the moment your IR35 insurance will support your defence if required.

It's an annoying position to be in as I have another contract lined up to start in the new year but they have said the role is outside currently but the client hasn't made a determination on post April. So waiting on confirmation of that.

However, my current client is doing it all now before I intend to leave at the end of the year.

Bit of a sh!t show.

[Paralytic]

You're too picky The point is, there's already a snapshot of who needs assessing and they'll all be assessed regardless of whether their contract ends/quits beween now and Jan/Feb

I'm picky too. Can you specifically say what is happening here as you've changed from agencies starting procedures and issuing SDS to now saying the client is assessing in advance of Jan/Feb and the agent will be sending out notifications of some sort. And you're speaking about this as if it will happen everywhere. You've not said how widespread this is.

I'm not sure what its adding - its obvious that some clients will be looking at assessments now and its obvious that some will get the agencies to send the communications.

The only point of concern would be if agencies (or clients) started sending our formal client-made SDS in Jan/Feb. Is that what you are saying will happen? I'm not expecting you to name names, but what evidence do you have of this?

[cojak]

Dilemma

That isn’t an issue to me. If you have a review and your working practices match the outside assessment then you can provide evidence that your assessment is correct. So if you leave they have nothing to say that the new engagement is the same.

And at the moment your IR35 insurance will support your defence if required.

[PTP]

Maybe its too late for me to make any sense of this. The first was wrong and the second is just agencies communicating clients intentions. What's wrong with that? Doesn't make any sense.

You're too picky The point is, there's already a snapshot of who needs assessing and they'll all be assessed regardless of whether their contract ends/quits beween now and Jan/Feb

[northernladuk]

I know that.

Agencies was probably the wrong term then. I've had e-mails from agency/MSP/whoever it is doing the dirty work for the client saying that they (the client or 3rd party assisting the client) have started their project to assess contractors. And that's been a common message here

Maybe its too late for me to make any sense of this. The first was wrong and the second is just agencies communicating clients intentions. What's wrong with that? Doesn't make any sense.

[PTP]

It's nothing to do with the agencies. The client makes the determinations.

I know that.

Agencies was probably the wrong term then. I've had e-mails from agency/MSP/whoever it is doing the dirty work for the client saying that they (the client or 3rd party assisting the client) have started their project to assess contractors. And that's been a common message here

[northernladuk]

Without meaning to instil fear, I know that agencies have started IR35 proceedings with the intention of issuing SDS in Jan/Feb. So I do wonder whether they will take a snapshot of contractors now and assess/submit for all off them regardless of whether they have left between now and when the blanket SDS is issued.

It's nothing to do with the agencies. The client makes the determinations.

[PTP]

So just spoke to the agency and asked about deferring their assessment for me - they are going to see if that can happen to coincide with Cojak's date (31st Dec).

She then called asking why i wanted to do this (as no other contractor seems to have raised this?!) and understand my thinking. i also said that I'm going to hand notice in to protect myself in case of an inside determination as didn't want to be on record as still being an engaged contractor with an inside determination. She stated that she couldn't confirm or deny at this stage and thought i was being hasty with this action, as even if it was an inside role this wouldn't take affect till after April in any event.

She then proceeded to say that HM have given assurance that they won't go after people retrospectively, then I reminded her of the GSK event of which she confirmed "they did not write to 1600 contractors individually" as HM confirmed they don't have the resources!

Without meaning to instil fear, I know that agencies have started IR35 proceedings with the intention of issuing SDS in Jan/Feb. So I do wonder whether they will take a snapshot of contractors now and assess/submit for all off them regardless of whether they have left between now and when the blanket SDS is issued.

[CompoundOverload]

Based on that paragraph then I'd be taking little notice of what the agent says from now on... If you weren't already.

Oddly enough the statement has been clarified I few mins ago in another thread..

https://www.contractoruk.com/forums/...st2686255.html

I actually got some info from Qdos earlier....

We assume that if you leave before a determination is made this would be less risky. If contractors leave once the determination has been made and there is an investigation in to retrospective years (although HMRC are saying targeted campaigns will not be launched). Hmrc would no doubt approach the client and if it comes to light the engagement is inside of IR35, HMRC would be taking in to consider what has actually changed. Was the client always of the opinion that the engagement was inside, did your company have the relevant rights as an independent contractor or did something change in the working practices which meant that your consultancy was operating outside but now is inside IR35.

[cojak]

So as I said.. Substitute your date for the December one.

Gonna PM Cojak to see if it's worth adding something in there to clarify.

I will.

[BlueSharp]

So just spoke to the agency and asked about deferring their assessment for me - they are going to see if that can happen to coincide with Cojak's date (31st Dec).

She then called asking why i wanted to do this (as no other contractor seems to have raised this?!) and understand my thinking. i also said that I'm going to hand notice in to protect myself in case of an inside determination as didn't want to be on record as still being an engaged contractor with an inside determination. She stated that she couldn't confirm or deny at this stage and thought i was being hasty with this action, as even if it was an inside role this wouldn't take affect till after April in any event.

She then proceeded to say that HM have given assurance that they won't go after people retrospectively, then I reminded her of the GSK event of which she confirmed "they did not write to 1600 contractors individually" as HM confirmed they don't have the resources!

The agency does not want to loose their commission and there is no risk to them. Nothing to see here. Obviously this is your decision based on your appetite to risk or apathy.

[northernladuk]

Based on that paragraph then I'd be taking little notice of what the agent says from now on... If you weren't already.

Oddly enough the statement has been clarified I few mins ago in another thread..

https://www.contractoruk.com/forums/...st2686255.html

[CompoundOverload]

So just spoke to the agency and asked about deferring their assessment for me - they are going to see if that can happen to coincide with Cojak's date (31st Dec).

She then called asking why i wanted to do this (as no other contractor seems to have raised this?!) and understand my thinking. i also said that I'm going to hand notice in to protect myself in case of an inside determination as didn't want to be on record as still being an engaged contractor with an inside determination. She stated that she couldn't confirm or deny at this stage and thought i was being hasty with this action, as even if it was an inside role this wouldn't take affect till after April in any event.

She then proceeded to say that HM have given assurance that they won't go after people retrospectively, then I reminded her of the GSK event of which she confirmed "they did not write to 1600 contractors individually" as HM confirmed they don't have the resources!

[CompoundOverload]

What are you worried about? The client (assuming private sector) won't have to put you under until April next year. They're probably just being proactive, which is more than can be said for my client.

So, if you're out of there by January then you have nothing to worry about.

And if you truly believe you are outside of IR35, I hope you have the real-life evidence to back this up. A contract with specific is not going to help much, and neither will the ODOS review, if your actual working conditions are much the same as a permie. If you have evidence, then present it to the client and help to sway the decision in your favour.

Because you're at the mercy of the client. They agree before it's an outside contract, then when faced with the liability post April (but have to make the determination prior to this date for best practice purposes) they cave.

It's just being diligent and avoiding any unnecessary pulls to justify your role.

[NotAllThere]

Yeah, my bad - I've re-posted it.

Since both attracted responses, I've merged them.