Client cutting rates to pay for ENIC

[Lance]

Just looking for input that's all - sounds fairly ludicrous as they are pretending contractors are inside now when they know fine and well no one is.

If the client is stating that you should be inside now, then you need to be very careful.
For a start DON'T STAY.
You are now aware that your agency contract is a sham, and any attenpts by you to use any of the important clauses will not be honoured. On that basis, whilst not a contract breach it does show that they (the agency) would be in breach if you tried to exercise some of those contractual terms.


I personally would write to the agency, immediately, informing them that "I've been alerted to the fact that the contract chain doesn't honour the contract I have signed. On that basis I am providing immediate notice of termination of the contract and am not available for any further work."

[eek]

Show them

CEST assessment rejected by judge as contractor recoups unlawfully deducted tax

and then the first part of

IR35 - Risk to Client / Business

and ask how lucky they are feeling and whether E&Y have a very good tax department with experts in Employers NI

[Henrik67]

Seems fair from client point of view

EY will replace anyone who leaves

Did you have a question ?


Sent from my iPhone using Contractor UK Forum

Just looking for input that's all - sounds fairly ludicrous as they are pretending contractors are inside now when they know fine and well no one is.

[Henrik67]

Some context (link) would be good. As would making it clearer what is a quote from elsewhere and what is your commentary.

Everything in inverted commas is a quote from elsewhere, thanks

[GhostofTarbera]

Listen to this belter - Client pretending that contractors are already inside so no impact - WTF!!

"Currently, contractors working inside IR35 would typically be paying an additional charge for Employer’s NIC (employer’s national insurance contributions) on the employment income deemed inside IR35. The new legislation passes this charge to the fee payer, Agency, and ultimately to Client."

Is this allowed? They also are NOT using CEST citing NHS case and relying on E&Y.

They seem to base inside determinations on
No ROS - Even though it's in the contract with the agency. "IR35 assessments are based on the work and role the contractor is doing, so the written contract is
only a minor secondary consideration for this status determination. This means that contracts cannot be “IR35 compliant” for this assessment, it is the actual work
situation that counts."

MOE - "Often due to the nature of the work, we note an implied mutuality of obligation as contractors become heavily involved with projects alongside employees."

Control - The element of ‘control’ is the biggest grey area of the primary tests. It is control over what, where,
when and how the work is done and is considered alongside the wider employee population and how they work. For example, employees often have control over ‘where’ and ‘how’ they work, and it’s only the ‘what’ that Client dictates, making that the key factor. This is just one aspect and is reviewed alongside all the other factors in the round.

Also saying that things like having indemnity insurance, having furloughs etc - These factors are not considered in determining IR35 status. These factors apply to all our
contractor population and therefore if they applied, this would automatically take everyone outside IR35.

What a crock of rubbish, thoughts?

Seems fair from client point of view

EY will replace anyone who leaves

Did you have a question ?


Sent from my iPhone using Contractor UK Forum

[Paralytic]

Some context (link) would be good. As would making it clearer what is a quote from elsewhere and what is your commentary.

[Henrik67]

Listen to this belter - Client pretending that contractors are already inside so no impact - WTF!!

"Currently, contractors working inside IR35 would typically be paying an additional charge for Employer’s NIC (employer’s national insurance contributions) on the employment income deemed inside IR35. The new legislation passes this charge to the fee payer, Agency, and ultimately to Client."

Is this allowed? They also are NOT using CEST citing NHS case and relying on E&Y.

They seem to base inside determinations on
No ROS - Even though it's in the contract with the agency. "IR35 assessments are based on the work and role the contractor is doing, so the written contract is
only a minor secondary consideration for this status determination. This means that contracts cannot be “IR35 compliant” for this assessment, it is the actual work
situation that counts."

MOE - "Often due to the nature of the work, we note an implied mutuality of obligation as contractors become heavily involved with projects alongside employees."

Control - "The element of ‘control’ is the biggest grey area of the primary tests. It is control over what, where,
when and how the work is done and is considered alongside the wider employee population and how they work. For example, employees often have control over ‘where’ and ‘how’ they work, and it’s only the ‘what’ that Client dictates, making that the key factor. This is just one aspect and is reviewed alongside all the other factors in the round".

Also saying that things like having indemnity insurance, having furloughs etc - These factors are not considered in determining IR35 status. These factors apply to all our
contractor population and therefore if they applied, this would automatically take everyone outside IR35.

What a crock of rubbish, thoughts?