Freelance Limited Company (FLC) offering from IPSE

[WordIsBond]

But what all the gainsayers are missing is that doing nothing - which seems to be the default position - will kill freelance contracting in the UK.

This is patently false. Some of the gainsayers are NOT missing that, they've been discussing various proposals, including on this thread.

[TheCoconutDog]

You've got a couple of hundred survey respondents. IPSE have a few thousand and counting. So who's the more important?

Sigh. This really is a pitiful posting. Wise up.

[TheCoconutDog]

It does sum up the quality of the IPSE forums though. That believe it or not is far more professional than many of the other replies I've received there.

I'll stick to here in future...

I don't think this stands up to scrutiny. To say that Mal's "who can pee the highest" post sums up the quality of the IPSE forums misrepresents them entirely (again).

I had a quick search of replies to your postings and couldn't see anything to back up your second sentence. Just because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't make them unprofessional.

[eek]

I deleted that comment 30 minutes ago as I had second thoughts and felt it off topic and a bit unnecessary. However, its still probably a fairer and more valid comment than the behaviour of resurrecting a deleted comment...

[yakitoo]

I don't have a dog in this fight, just to say. I won't be FLC, and neither the current IR35 nor where we think it is going are likely to hit me, in general. I'm just not subject to SDC, I work from home, and most of clients are outside the UK.

But something strange happened to me, and I thought I'd ramble on about it here. I'm not sure why I chose this thread to talk about it, but maybe it will come to me later.

I told all my friends and neighbours that I was going to go talk to our local council and make a proposal that would affect them all and might cost them some money if the council adopted it.

When they wanted to know what it was, I told them I was only going to discuss it with those of them that paid dues to join a club I started.

And then I told them that I was also only going to discuss it at my house, to make sure only club members could even hear the discussion.

A bunch of them were talking about the same thing, and some even talked about my proposals, over at the community hall. They invited me to come, said there were a whole bunch of them talking about it, but I wouldn't come, even though hardly anyone came to my house to talk about it.

Why doesn't anyone on my street like me anymore?

The thing that makes me sick is that I joined IPSE and now they'll claim, "We represent XX,000 independent members" when they propose this thing, and they don't represent my views at all. But they'll include me in that XX,000.

Couldnt agree more- it really is looking like a only one show in town over there at the moment.

[TheCoconutDog]

I deleted that comment 30 minutes ago as I had second thoughts and felt it off topic and a bit unnecessary. However, its still probably a fairer and more valid comment than the behaviour of resurrecting a deleted comment...

FTAOD: I didn't resurrect your post - it was in my current tapatalk feed.

[jamesbrown]

Sorry eek, but you really are misrepresenting the IPSE stance. They are trying to engage in reasoned dialogue, and I wish more folk from here would throw their constructively critical 2p in over there ( looking at you jamesbrown ).

I responded to the survey and included a few paragraphs at the end. It's difficult to engage seriously across two separate forums and, beyond the survey, this is clearly the best place, as it has the widest readership and is publicly available. Despite the thread title, this discussion goes far beyond the FLC. It's unfortunate that we're now spending much of our time trying to debunk the FLC rather than discussing the actual consultation and discussion in front of us.

I also agree completely with the analogy that WiB makes above. Obviously, IPSE invested a lot of time and money in this proposal, with good intentions, and it's difficult to climb down from that; that much is clear from the IPSE forum. I dare say the bar, in terms of negative feedback, will need to be very high to kill this proposal. I also think that quite a few IPSE members could be convinced by the concept, even if the concept isn't deliverable. The presumption is that the proposal will be discussed with HMG. I think that's a very risky strategy, because a lot of the suggestions are made in a broader context (as concessions), but the vessel itself is likely to be sunk, so the real contribution will be quite different from the intended one.

[eek]

I responded to the survey and included a few paragraphs at the end. It's difficult to engage seriously across two separate forums and, beyond the survey, this is clearly the best place, as it has the widest readership and is publicly available. Despite the thread title, this discussion goes far beyond the FLC. It's unfortunate that we're now spending much of our time trying to debunk the FLC rather than discussing the actual consultation and discussion in front of us.

I also agree completely with the analogy that WiB makes above. Obviously, IPSE invested a lot of time and money in this proposal, with good intentions, and it's difficult to climb down from that; that much is clear from the IPSE forum. I dare say the bar, in terms of negative feedback, will need to be very high to kill this proposal. I also think that quite a few IPSE members could be convinced by the concept, even if the concept isn't deliverable. The presumption is that the proposal will be discussed with HMG. I think that's a very risky strategy, because a lot of the suggestions are made in a broader context (as concessions), but the vessel itself is likely to be sunk, so the real contribution will be quite different from the intended one.

+1. At best the FLC is an option but its a total distraction at the moment... The thing it is that I don't think its what HMRC have asked for at the moment, both documents have questions contained in them and want answers to those questions...

Also its worth remembering that the IR35 discussion document is not restricted to agencies the document states

Legislation was introduced in 2000 to tackle the avoidance of employment taxes by those who
work through intermediaries, primarily their own company, often known as a Personal Service
Company (PSC).

So its not just end client -> agency -> PSC / FLC -> freelancer that is impacted but also

end client -> PSC / FLC -> freelancer

Just wanted to make sure that those who think they may be OK may find they actually are not...

[FK1]

LLP is still subject to IR35, so if inside IR35 you would still pay tax on the deemed payment just like a Ltd Co contractor would. It gains you nothing if inside.

HMRC would undoubtedly be all over you if you gave your helpful wife an equal share in the profits of an LLP. You'd have to be able to justify that any income you sent her way was fully justified by her contribution to the company.

It's less tax efficient than a Ltd Co.

Other than those things, you've suggested a great idea.

Most of the objections here in the past have been problems with joining existing LLPs, some of which may have been scams/schemes. Those wouldn't be a problem if you made your own LLP. But the other things would be an issue.

LLPs do not use dividends so new 7.5% tax on dividends does not impact them.
craig1 wrote
http://forums.contractoruk.com/accou...ml#post1618977

I pay about 2-3% more tax than a typical contractor going through their own Ltd Co)

So I expect it might be tax efficient on the same degree as Ltd with that new dividend tax.
LLP could not be a solution for all, but myself and some friends of mine have wives/partners (so at least three families) who very close professionally as developer + consultant, developer + tester, developer + developer.
And I do consider LLP for a family/partners to be own by them only. At least it is worth to consider as an option together with LTD/Umbrella.

I have no membership with IPSE this year but I would prefer they would suggest something more simple than FLC as "Limited Liability Sole Trader" or "average tax on inside IR35 projects (average between outside IR35 and PAYE)".

A typical IT contractor might have "inside" and "outside" IR35 projects simultaneously or consecutively because of it depends on a new client/project role nature and I do not understand how so static FLC will fit that dynamic reality where your employment status might be changed on every new engagement/assignment a few times in a year.

[SAS Ninja]

Joined IPSE to leave feedback on their FLC proposal!