Reply to: Evening everyone. New to contracting......

[northernladuk]

Just to clarify I thought if it was more than 24 months the rule kicks in. If the role is for 24 months then OP would be able to claim expenses.

No. It is when you KNOW you will be there for 24 months. If you take 3 6 month renewals taking you to 18 months and then they offer you 7+ months contract you cannot claim anything for that contract so effectively you have only been able to claim for 18 months.

It's been explained infinitum on here.

What you have to be careful with also is the dates of a two year gig. If you start on the 6th of June and the gig ends on the 8th of June it's not a 2 year gig. It's a 2 years and 2 days which puts you straight over. My last client gave out standard 6 month renewals but for some quirke the last 6 months ended a week over the original start date. Check the dates carefully.

[Scotchpie]

Quite right! For the benefit of the OP, TheFaQQer is referring to the fact that you could work at several sites for several clients and HMRC could deem that to be a single geographical location. A good example of this is people working for several different banks within the same square mile of the city of London – HMRC would class this as a single location for the purpose of this test.

I should add that HMRC do not actually define how close the places need to be for them to deem it a single location.

Craig

Yep, I've been caught out with that. I commuted to Manchester for 18 months. One train and a short walk. Everything was fine and I claimed my expenses.

The next contract was with a new client and for 12 months. I commuted on the same train followed by a similar walk to the office. Couldn't claim as HMRC regarded it as the same location, even though it was a new contract with a new client in a different office block in a different part of the city centre.

Now if the second contract had also required me after arriving in Manchester to take a tram to some out of the way place outside of the centre, all would have been well... but alas.

[kaiser78]

Yes, as soon as you know it's 24 months you are supposed to relocate! Google the site for 24-month rule...

Just to clarify I thought if it was more than 24 months the rule kicks in. If the role is for 24 months then OP would be able to claim expenses.

[Ashley01]

Fair one chaps.

This new contract is a change of location from where I am now and I dont expect to be working at that site after 24 months.

Cheers.

Ash!!

[Craig at Nixon Williams]

FTFY - you may be in the same location but on different premises for different clients and still fall foul of the 24 month rule.

Quite right! For the benefit of the OP, TheFaQQer is referring to the fact that you could work at several sites for several clients and HMRC could deem that to be a single geographical location. A good example of this is people working for several different banks within the same square mile of the city of London – HMRC would class this as a single location for the purpose of this test.

I should add that HMRC do not actually define how close the places need to be for them to deem it a single location.

Craig

[TheFaQQer]

The 24 month rule will only apply if you expect to be on the site working in the same location for more than 24 months – therefore if you do not expect it to cross 24 months then you will be able to claim.

FTFY - you may be in the same location but on different premises for different clients and still fall foul of the 24 month rule.

[Craig at Nixon Williams]

I took the above points from the site info. I don't expect the contract to last any longer than 24 months. So therefore I should be ok?

The 24 month rule will only apply if you expect to be on the site for more than 24 months – therefore if you do not expect it to cross 24 months then you will be able to claim.

If the length of the contract is uncertain then the claim should qualify until 24 months is reached when, as from that date, the claim will fail.

This bit isn't right - it is about when you expect to be working at a location. If it is uncertain how long you will be there, there will come a point when you expect to be at a location for more than the 24 months.

[Ashley01]

Yes, as soon as you know it's 24 months you are supposed to relocate! Google the site for 24-month rule...

Ok thanks. I was aware of this rule. Although from a different angle.

I was under the impression that if you exceed 2 years on one contract location you are then expected to relocate. This is how my umbrella company explained it to me.

"- If a person is engaged on a contract that will last less, or is expected to last less, or it is reasonable to assume that it will last less than 24 months, the 24 month rule is not broken.

- If the length of the contract is uncertain then the claim should qualify until 24 months is reached when, as from that date, the claim will fail.

- If the length of the contract is expected to be less than 24 months and then something changes and the contract is then expected to last more than 24 months then the claim fails as from the date of the change.

- If the length of the contract is expected to be more than 24 months and then something changes and the contract is then expected to last less than 24 months then the claim is allowable as from the date of the change."

I took the above points from the site info. I don't expect the contract to last any longer than 24 months. So therefore I should be ok?

Cheers.

Ash!!

[stek]

How do you mean?

I will be incurring expenses on a daily basis.

Is there a ruling that the offer of a certain length of contract removes the right to claim expenses?

Cheers

Ash!!

Yes, as soon as you know it's 24 months you are supposed to relocate! Google the site for 24-month rule...

[Ashley01]

Also 2 year gig means no expenses....

How do you mean?

I will be incurring expenses on a daily basis.

Is there a ruling that the offer of a certain length of contract removes the right to claim expenses?

Cheers

Ash!!

[Ashley01]

Engineering contractors apparently appear to be a different breed from most IT contractors. They can end up in companies for longer than most permies. 99% wouldn't know IR35 if it came and bit them on the arse and the 1% that do sneer and laugh at it.

They also appear to be the guys keeping the EBT's in fresh meat.

I'm a little aware of IR35 as I've been working through an umbrella company and I've read about it in parts.

I will attempt to read a lot more as I press go for the ltd. company option.

Cheers.

Ash!!

[Ashley01]

Evening everyone. New to contracting......

"Boomed" is the traditional title posted in the General forum when a contractor lets us know they have secured a new contract. Tradition then dictates that we bestow many dancing bananas upon the successful contractor. You will not see the bananas on the app unfortunately. Have one for getting the 2 year gig

Meant to ask, are you offshore? My bro works in the industry and and tax can be a bit of a fiddle...

I understand now. Thanks for the

Ash!!

Edit: Nope, onshore.

[stek]

Also 2 year gig means no expenses....

[cojak]

"Boomed" is the traditional title posted in the General forum when a contractor lets us know they have secured a new contract. Tradition then dictates that we bestow many dancing bananas upon the successful contractor. You will not see the bananas on the app unfortunately. Have one for getting the 2 year gig

Meant to ask, are you offshore? My bro works in the industry and and tax can be a bit of a fiddle...

Engineering contractors apparently appear to be a different breed from most IT contractors. They can end up in companies for longer than most permies. 99% wouldn't know IR35 if it came and bit them on the arse and the 1% that do sneer and laugh at it.

They also appear to be the guys keeping the EBT's in fresh meat.

[administrator]

I was alluding to the fact I am not sure his is the industry I want to see BOOMED

Far too early in the morning for me to recognise any attempts at humour

Good joke though, very slick...