• 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.
  • FREE webinar: What does a post IR35 reform CV look like? : Mon, May 10, 2021 7:15 PM - 8:15 PM BST More details here.

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.

Previously on "Assessed as Inside from April or a Blanket Ban - it's time to leave"

Collapse

  • creativity
    replied
    I had to quit one of my roles because their determination contradicted mine. I contested and put forward evidence including Cest tool documentation but they didnt want to listen. In HRs eyes there is always an element of control so you will always be inside - hard to to defend and justify at the same time, but you wouldn't win against HMRC so better off out dependent on history with client.
    What I did do was contest, supply evidence and quit. Never joined PAYE or closed my company (not viable for me as I have other clients). Now all my work must be work packages or supplier. They will come knocking again soon but I'm not relying on it, its their loss.

    Leave a comment:


  • northernladuk
    replied
    Yep and I'm afraid all I can give is an opinion as we don't really know.

    Someone else might have a different opinion.

    Leave a comment:


  • DJL
    replied
    Originally posted by northernladuk View Post
    You are putting very small hurdles and technicalities in the way that will fall apart at even a glance by HMRC. Are you willing to put 10's of K on the line with that as your risk mitigation?
    Just after an opinion and my primary inclination is still to head out of there even if I am sat twiddling my thumbs for a couple of months. I’m as risk averse as my client, but seem to be in the minority of 200+ contractors where I am.

    Leave a comment:


  • northernladuk
    replied
    Originally posted by DJL View Post
    But if I’m doing another new role on a different contract prior to the 6th, then the determination they made on the existing one doesn’t stand as its pre legislation change, and is not required to go to HMRC? I suppose the issue would be if other people cross the line in the same role as outside/inside, the wonderful taxman would make the assumption I was too.
    What's has pre legislation got to do with it. The client has provided evidence that the role is inside, legislation in place or not. HMRC don't need it going to them. They go investigate...well they ask for the determination. Not much of an investigation.

    You are putting very small hurdles and technicalities in the way that will fall apart at even a glance by HMRC. Are you willing to put 10's of K on the line with that as your risk mitigation?

    Leave a comment:


  • DJL
    replied
    Originally posted by northernladuk View Post
    Do you have a determination on the old role? Same client is going to put you on HMRCs list, having a determination of the role you were doing puts you in their cross hairs. New contract make a difference? Not really.

    Think about your situation, break it down bit by bit. Nothing new in your situation.
    But if I’m doing another new role on a different contract prior to the 6th, then the determination they made on the existing one doesn’t stand as its pre legislation change, and is not required to go to HMRC? I suppose the issue would be if other people cross the line in the same role as outside/inside, the wonderful taxman would make the assumption I was too.

    Leave a comment:


  • northernladuk
    replied
    Do you have a determination on the old role? Same client is going to put you on HMRCs list, having a determination of the role you were doing puts you in their cross hairs. New contract make a difference? Not really.

    Think about your situation, break it down bit by bit. Nothing new in your situation.

    Leave a comment:


  • DJL
    replied
    Originally posted by DJL View Post
    I'm about to embark on scenario 1 as I'm basically sh*t scared of the second one - even though my clients inside SDS determination is clearly wrong! I know I can be investigated at any time, but my understanding is that the first scenario is the safest due to a new client with a new contract and role, and new working conditions.

    My next big concern is someone else in scenario 2 being flagged by HMRC for my current client, and me subsequently then being scooped up by HMRC in another GSK style scatter bomb approach! Unfortunately there's bugger all I can do about that one but pray, and continue to pay for my IR35 insurance!!
    Interesting turn of events for me today. Current client has another role that I’m qualified for and are looking at offering this with a new contract instead of continue in existing role now inside with a new contract. Although Client A with Agency A pre and post, I’m curious that due to the complete role change (not just a tweak), will help fend off the investigation if it comes?

    Leave a comment:


  • BolshieBastard
    replied
    Originally posted by revcrocket View Post
    I am contracting via an agency at a big company. By and large they have banned the use of PSC's and had the Agency submit notice on all contractors Ltd company's to end in a few weeks, with the option given to leave, go PAYE with the agency or go PAYE with the end client. On the plus side they haven't given anyone a formal inside IR35 determination, just that they no longer will engage Ltd companies. (They have made an exception for a few folk on a project that is due to go live in May and allowed them to continue operating outside IR35)

    I had made my decision to leave largely due to reasons already covered within this forum.

    This morning a curve ball was thrown where the interim CIO asked for a meeting and said his consultancy, which already provides Project/Programme management resource to my existing end client, would like to take on my Ltd company, but to provide my services to the same end client that I already have. I will obviously get a QDOS check done on the contract when i receive it, but does anyone see a problem with this given its the same end client, albeit whereas a recruitment agency hired my company until now it would now be a consultancy?

    The consultancy has existed for a number of years and meets the small business exemption of turnover of £10.2m or less;
    £5.1m or less on its balance sheet; or 50 employees or less. (the end client obviously doesn't) which i believe means I can certify myself outside/inside rather than relying on them regardless, please correct me if I am wrong on this, but also does the fact its the same end client potentially cause problems?

    And thanks in advance for advice!
    No one see the potential elephant in the room here? This consultancy may satisfy the IR35 exemption but, that just shifts the IR35 onus onto you. And if it is a contrived arrangement to get around IR35, that's a double jeopardy imvho.

    Leave a comment:


  • NO TO RETRO
    replied
    Originally posted by eek View Post
    HMRC have until April 2021 to start claims - I'm holding judgement until after HMRC's favourite times of Easter and May bank holidays to issue letters
    Ah OK, fair enough. I think my question was borne out of the timescales that had been described i.e.

    End of March you appear on an agency intermediary report with a high gross and low salary.
    End of April you appear on an agency intermediary report with a high gross and high salary.

    That sounded like something that HMRC would jump on straight away and letters would be triggered. Or at least it sounded like that was the warning message.

    Not something that they'd sit on for 3 years before sending. And yes, I'm not so naive to think that HMRC couldn't possibly sit on something for 3 years before taking action.

    Leave a comment:


  • SouWester
    replied
    Originally posted by northernladuk View Post
    It was widely understood the PS roll out was a test bed for the Private Sector so any failed cases could have been a real problem from HMRC.
    +1 to that.

    There is very little black and white in all of this. It's a spectrum of risk, and a spectrum of pain as well. I'm just trying to keep on the low end of both.

    You would feel like a complete tit if you do get bagged, but could have done something to avoid it. Don't be a zombietractor (TM).

    Leave a comment:


  • northernladuk
    replied
    Originally posted by SouWester View Post
    Just because they didn't then, doesn't mean they won't now.

    It's up to you and you appetite for risk.

    Some fruit is undoubtedly hanging lower than other fruit. For me I think it prudent not to be in the lower branches.
    Compliancelady who posts on here has indicate some letters or something went out some Public Sector people but I've no evidence of this so skeptical. I think SouWester is right though. It was widely understood the PS roll out was a test bed for the Private Sector so any failed cases could have been a real problem from HMRC. Better to wait till it's fully implemented, using learnings from the Public Sector debacle and then look at chasing people down.

    Pure guess work but that's what I'd be considering if I were them.

    It could even be a slow burn rather than hit everyone on April the 7th as well. You'd have to have to be daft to think HMRC won't continue to monitor using investigations, just like they did with the old IR35. THey won't implement this and then walk away. So will it be a mass attach of outside to inside or it will it be a tickle of cases over time at the same numbers nowadays? Who knows. Which ever it is, it's not the time to be sitting there all smug thinking they didn't do it before you are safe.

    That said plenty of contractors couldn't give a flying fig about IR35 before so I am sure that will continue and I am sure some of them will get away with it and come on here to tell us so.

    Leave a comment:


  • SouWester
    replied
    Originally posted by NO TO RETRO View Post
    IR35 reform started in the public sector in April 2017.

    I don't know the figures but I'm assuming that hundreds, if not thousands of contractors who were previously outside IR35 remained with the same agency and end client on an inside IR35 contract through an umbrella company?

    What happened to them when they were flagged up on the Agency intermediary report to HMRC?

    I don't remember reading of HMRC going after these thousands of pieces of low hanging fruit that have been spoken of on this thread.

    I am genuinely asking the question here

    In fact, if there are people of that nature on this forum, perhaps they could share their experiences.
    Apologies if I have missed anything in the legislation that treated public sector contractors differently.
    Just because they didn't then, doesn't mean they won't now. The potential harvest is bigger now.

    It's up to you and your assessment of the situation, and appetite for risk.

    Some fruit is undoubtedly hanging lower than other fruit. For me I think it prudent not to be in the lower branches.
    Last edited by SouWester; 26 February 2020, 19:11.

    Leave a comment:


  • eek
    replied
    Originally posted by NO TO RETRO View Post
    IR35 reform started in the public sector in April 2017.

    I don't know the figures but I'm assuming that hundreds, if not thousands of contractors who were previously outside IR35 remained with the same agency and end client on an inside IR35 contract through an umbrella company?

    What happened to them when they were flagged up on the Agency intermediary report to HMRC?

    I don't remember reading of HMRC going after these thousands of pieces of low hanging fruit that have been spoken of on this thread.

    I am genuinely asking the question here

    In fact, if there are people of that nature on this forum, perhaps they could share their experiences.
    Apologies if I have missed anything in the legislation that treated public sector contractors differently.
    HMRC have until April 2021 to start claims - I'm holding judgement until after HMRC's favourite times of Easter and May bank holidays to issue letters

    Leave a comment:


  • NO TO RETRO
    replied
    Public Sector cases where people stayed on inside IR35

    IR35 reform started in the public sector in April 2017.

    I don't know the figures but I'm assuming that hundreds, if not thousands of contractors who were previously outside IR35 remained with the same agency and end client on an inside IR35 contract through an umbrella company?

    What happened to them when they were flagged up on the Agency intermediary report to HMRC?

    I don't remember reading of HMRC going after these thousands of pieces of low hanging fruit that have been spoken of on this thread.

    I am genuinely asking the question here

    In fact, if there are people of that nature on this forum, perhaps they could share their experiences.
    Apologies if I have missed anything in the legislation that treated public sector contractors differently.

    Leave a comment:


  • revcrocket
    replied
    Originally posted by eek View Post
    Depends on what the end client (retailer says) but given the interim CIO is involved it sounds acceptable and achievable just as dodgy as hell.

    How is he proposing to get round your agency's handcuff clause?
    I am guessing, but because his consultancy doesn't have any contract or dealing with the agency, whereas the handcuff clause is presumably between the end client and the agency so isn't applicable.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X