Reply to: Tagged in Slack as "Contrator inside IR35"

[WTFH]

So just now a colleague in the US looked me up in Slack while screensharing, and I noticed that for my end client's US office I'm tagged as "EU Contractor inside IR35". I guess that's wrong on two counts, EU and IR35 It's the IR35 bit that I wanted to question. As a result of the deferral until 2021 I'm outside, so it's factually inaccurate. Setting that aside, should I be concerned that the end client feels it's necessary to identify people in this way? Interested to hear people's thoughts. Thanks.

My thoughts are you should ask the client.
Are they a client you've been working for over a few years, or one you've just started working for?
The IR35 thing shows that someone, somewhere in the company has heard of IR35 and feels it's a valid comment to make about you. It's most likely come from their HR department, so maybe you need to ask them.
And the "EU" piece? Is it an internal document or external? If it's internal, then they are using an acronym that might mean something different to you to what it means to them.
Ever worked for a company that defines regions for reporting, and they use acronyms and terms that aren't necessarily correct politically or geographically?
Here's a few I've seen in places I've contracted:
LAPAC - South American & Japan.
BENELUX - Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg, Denmark
NORDIC - Netherlands, North Germany, Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Norway
EU - Europe, Egypt, Israel & South Africa
EU - Europe excluding UK & Ireland
EU - Europe & Brazil
UK - GB
UK - UK & IRL
IRL - IRL & NI
Global: US & Canada.
International: Everywhere apart from US & Canada.
Then you get places that define France with or without the DOM/TOMs.

Basically, if you're getting hung up on a couple of letters, it's almost a sign that you're treating yourself like a permie.
If it doesn't affect my take home, they can give me a job description or put any codes they want against my name. They have brought me in to deliver results, not for a political debate or how their HR reporting works.

[AnthonyQuinn]

Point taken, badly worded on my part. What I should have said is that the contract with the end client doesn't state that I'm inside.

Eh? Why should the contract say that it is inside? As someone else said, the client does not care. It is for you to determine. Nothing to do with the contract.

You should have a word with the client to explain the potential risks. If the yank has you on slack as inside then clearly he / she has been told that you are. They wouldnt know IR35 otherwise. In fact there might be client systems set up with a record of you to be inside.

Bear in mind, 'imagining' that you are outside is of no consequence. make sure that people actually are able to genuinely perceive the difference in their working with you as opposed to their colleagues.

[Paralytic]

I'd be more concerned about actual working practices, than what some HR system says. It could be as simple as them having a list of dropdown options, and that was the closest match, not that someone went out of their way to assess your role at the client.

At one previous client, I had the wrong gender in WorkDay. This was before gender self-selection was fashionable, but it didn't cause me any concern.

[jamesbrown]

Badly expressed on my part, I should have said that my contract with them does not state inside. It would have done, had the reforms not been deferred.

OK, but then you would've been operating inside, else fraudulently, so that is moot.

In any case, what matters is the reality of your working practices, more so than the actual words in the contract. If the client paints a picture that says you're inside, then you need to paint an excellent picture that says the opposite. The contract won't help tremendously with that, hence the need for good record keeping. Obviously, if the client is onside, then it becomes much easier because you can present a united front to HMRC under investigation.

[jamesbrown]

Can you explain "absent some excellent record keeping" - do you mean apart from, not absent? Or what? Thx

I mean that, unless you have excellent records that show you as being outside IR35, sufficient to offset any client opinion to the contrary, then you are in trouble.

In short, if the client isn't on your side when HMRC investigate, then it's an uphill battle.

Fortunately for you, the probability of investigation remains quite low for now. Post April 2021, it might not be if you're at a large client that is well-known for body shopping in large numbers of permietractors.

[elsergiovolador]

Point taken, badly worded on my part. What I should have said is that the contract with the end client doesn't state that I'm inside.

Contract does not need to say that to be inside. It's mostly about how the relationship is described. For example, can you provide a substitute?

[VirginiaWoolf]

End client does not give a hoot, you are a bod working like a permie


Sent from my iPhone using Contractor UK Forum

I'm definitely just a bod mostly pushing treacle up hill but is it OK to tag people like that? Without informing us, without explaining their reasoning (even if an explanation was all guff)?

[VirginiaWoolf]

And, based on that comment, I'm guessing your record keeping isn't so excellent...

Badly expressed on my part, I should have said that my contract with them does not state inside. It would have done, had the reforms not been deferred.

[VirginiaWoolf]

Yes, you should be worried in the sense that the client will be questioned by HMRC under investigation so, if they see you as a permie, you'd struggle to convince HMRC (or a tribunal) otherwise, absent some excellent record keeping on your part that showed the reality as being very different.

Can you explain "absent some excellent record keeping" - do you mean apart from, not absent? Or what? Thx

[VirginiaWoolf]

If you're marking yourself outside of IR35 I would definitely be concerned.



Well, no. As a result of the deferral, you continue to be responsible for your own determination and the consequences of it. Whether that means you are inside or outside is a very different question.

Point taken, badly worded on my part. What I should have said is that the contract with the end client doesn't state that I'm inside.

[courtg9000]

I had a similar discussion today about how to categorise contractors. Contractors in my business mean companies taking on sheet piling, catering or cleaning. 68 emails later I am no nearer a resolution with a particularly difficult client.

[jamesbrown]

As a result of the deferral until 2021 I'm outside

And, based on that comment, I'm guessing your record keeping isn't so excellent...

[jamesbrown]

Yes, you should be worried in the sense that the client will be questioned by HMRC under investigation so, if they see you as a permie, you'd struggle to convince HMRC (or a tribunal) otherwise, absent some excellent record keeping on your part that showed the reality as being very different.

[vwdan]

If you're marking yourself outside of IR35 I would definitely be concerned.

As a result of the deferral until 2021 I'm outside, so it's factually inaccurate.

Well, no. As a result of the deferral, you continue to be responsible for your own determination and the consequences of it. Whether that means you are inside or outside is a very different question.

[GhostofTarbera]

End client does not give a hoot, you are a bod working like a permie


Sent from my iPhone using Contractor UK Forum