Originally posted by czakky
View Post
- 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.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
What do you think will happen to agencies next April?
Collapse
X
Collapse
-
But do those businesses resent relying on contractors? They may be just expecting a cheaper resource once all the dust settles."I can put any old tat in my sig, put quotes around it and attribute to someone of whom I've heard, to make it sound true."
- Voltaire/Benjamin Franklin/Anne Frank... -
My 'home' is in Edinburgh, but at gig in Manchester for last 6 months/next 6 months racking up £2.5k+ in T&S per month. That will absolutely not be viable post-April if proposed changes go through on T&S.
I will have to rely on getting a good gig in Edinburger instead which should not be the end of the world, I know there are loads of T&S reliant bods working all over Edinburger wo would have to return dahn sathComment
-
Have you filled in the surveys http://goo.gl/forms/O2O4WhscV4 and https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/AUCAEConDoc ?Originally posted by allaboutthebenjis View PostMy 'home' is in Edinburgh, but at gig in Manchester for last 6 months/next 6 months racking up £2.5k+ in T&S per month. That will absolutely not be viable post-April if proposed changes go through on T&S.
I will have to rely on getting a good gig in Edinburger instead which should not be the end of the world, I know there are loads of T&S reliant bods working all over Edinburger wo would have to return dahn sathmerely at clientco for the entertainmentComment
-
Unlikely. Most of the North East companies I know of (except Capita) have clear cut rules for contractor instead of permie...Originally posted by cojak View PostBut do those businesses resent relying on contractors? They may be just expecting a cheaper resource once all the dust settles.merely at clientco for the entertainmentComment
-
Maybe we should start a swap shop site. I see so many posts where people are travelling halfway across the country for gig's. So many of us must pass each other going in the opposite direction to the same type of gig. I'll take yours in my home town and you can have mine in your town. We could place each other as subs and have and IR35 is sorted... Oh.. Hang on
'CUK forum personality of 2011 - Winner - Yes really!!!!
Comment
-
Capita deliberately do this with their own staff, as I said on another post.Originally posted by northernladuk View Posttravelling halfway across the country for gig's. So many of us must pass each other going in the opposite direction to the same type of gig.
They have their own travel agency and pass this cost all on to the client.The Chunt of Chunts.Comment
-
-
Thank you very much. So this was implemented in 1996, discussed in 2008/9 but withdrawn and now implemented again now...Originally posted by Stevie Wonder BoyEMPLOYEE TRAVEL & SUSISTENCE: INLAND REVENUE CONSULTS | News | Local Government Chronicle - Looking at this it must have been after the consultation in 1996 - So 1997?
Some serious irony here...
Would be worth an FOI to see what was said as a result of this consultation - And use the same arguments, bearing in mind this allowed the 24 months. In my opinion this should be the type of thing that would be a winner in a court case.
or just write ...
"Copies of the consultative document are available by post, price £3 (post free) from: The Inland Revenue Reference Library South West Wing Bush House Strand London WC2B 4RD."
hang on ... just searching the archive ....
Ok, looks like someone has beaten you to it ...
Lawspeed leads AEMC response to Treasury consultation on contractors
Interesting argument - "This same consultation claimed ten years ago that there would be no loss to the exchequer in granting relief to site-based workers, where the Treasury now claims, without apparent basis, it is costing £300m" - Now £400m to account for inflation I guess....
Other interesting numbers.
83% of contractors said the tax relief on travel expenses was important to them
27% of contractors said they would seek permanent employment if tax relief on travel expenses was removed
Only 29% of the 27% of contractors who said they would seek permanent employment said their existing client would offer them the option of direct employment
90% of contractors said it would be a loss if umbrella companies ceased to exist and there was no alternative model of employment.merely at clientco for the entertainmentComment
-
Good findOriginally posted by Stevie Wonder BoyEMPLOYEE TRAVEL & SUSISTENCE: INLAND REVENUE CONSULTS | News | Local Government Chronicle - Looking at this it must have been after the consultation in 1996 - So 1997?
Some serious irony here...
Would be worth an FOI to see what was said as a result of this consultation - And use the same arguments, bearing in mind this allowed the 24 months. In my opinion this should be the type of thing that would be a winner in a court case.
or just write ...
"Copies of the consultative document are available by post, price £3 (post free) from: The Inland Revenue Reference Library South West Wing Bush House Strand London WC2B 4RD."
hang on ... just searching the archive ....
Ok, looks like someone has beaten you to it ...
Lawspeed leads AEMC response to Treasury consultation on contractors
Interesting argument - "This same consultation claimed ten years ago that there would be no loss to the exchequer in granting relief to site-based workers, where the Treasury now claims, without apparent basis, it is costing £300m" - Now £400m to account for inflation I guess....
Other interesting numbers.
83% of contractors said the tax relief on travel expenses was important to them
27% of contractors said they would seek permanent employment if tax relief on travel expenses was removed
Only 29% of the 27% of contractors who said they would seek permanent employment said their existing client would offer them the option of direct employment
90% of contractors said it would be a loss if umbrella companies ceased to exist and there was no alternative model of employment.
This kind of backs up what HMRC said - they didn't think that it would have any impact because there weren't that many contractors - now there's loads (allegedly) and it has an impact.
Comment
-
Unlike contractors who recycle our experiences time and again, and get paid better than most public sector bods can dream of.Originally posted by Stevie Wonder BoyLooks like HMRC implement a relaxation of the rules, followed by a tightening of the rules. Followed by a consultation to relax/tighten the rules. They must pull it out of a drawer dust it off and re-issue.
The wheel spins on and on till they pick up the gold plated pension.
Comment
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Andrew Griffith MP says Tories would reform IR35 Oct 7 00:41
- New umbrella company JSL rules: a 2026 guide for contractors Oct 5 22:50
- Top 5 contractor compliance challenges, as 2025-26 nears Oct 3 08:53
- Joint and Several Liability ‘won’t retire HMRC's naughty list’ Oct 2 05:28
- What contractors can take from the Industria Umbrella Ltd case Sep 30 23:05
- Is ‘Open To Work’ on LinkedIn due an IR35 dropdown menu? Sep 30 05:57
- IR35: Control — updated for 2025-26 Sep 28 21:28
- Can a WhatsApp message really be a contract? Sep 25 20:17
- Can a WhatsApp message really be a contract? Sep 25 08:17
- ‘Subdued’ IT contractor jobs market took third tumble in a row in August Sep 25 08:07


Comment