Just received this from our contact at HMRC

[webberg]

There is a PMQ scheduled for noon today.

I'm wondering if we will see the Bill after that has finished on the grounds that otherwise publication might throw up an unexpected question and disrupt the carefully scripted pantomime that passes for democracy in the Commons?

[MarkT]

There is a PMQ scheduled for noon today.

I'm wondering if we will see the Bill after that has finished on the grounds that otherwise publication might throw up an unexpected question and disrupt the carefully scripted pantomime that passes for democracy in the Commons?

I have a question here from Neil in Wolverhampton...

[jamesbrown]

I have a question here from Neil in Wolverhampton...

I have a question from Ben and Jo, two lawyers from Cumbernauld.

[mudskipper]

T&S responses published

https://www.gov.uk/government/consul...nd-subsistence

Does not bode well...

"3.13 Although the government recognises that supervision, direction or control
is a subjective test, and that a minority of engagements will be hard to
categorise, it believes that clear guidance should help ensure businesses
and individuals are able to understand when a worker is under the right of
supervision, direction or control in the manner they undertake their work.
There is already a substantial amount of case law in this area, which will
further support HMRC’s guidance and the understanding of these terms.
HMRC will review the existing guidance on supervision, direction or
10
control and issue guidance for this measure before it comes into force in
2016.

3.14 The government is also confident that its current definition of the terms
will capture those whose work is akin to employees, without affecting
those who are akin to the self-employed. The government considers that
with clear guidance on these definitions, it will be easier to understand
where someone is not under supervision, direction or control.

3.15 It is important to note that the supervision, direction or control test being
proposed for use by employment intermediaries in relation to these
changes, will only be relevant for deciding eligibility for relief on travel and
subsistence for home to work travel. It will not impact on a worker’s
employment status, or wider employment rights"

[chopper]

This publication seems relevant

Income Tax: employment intermediaries and relief for travel and subsistence

Legislation will be introduced in Finance Bill 2016 to restrict access to relief for home to work travel and subsistence where a worker:

personally provides services to another person
is employed through an employment intermediary
is under (the right of) the supervision, direction or control of any person, in the manner in which they undertake their work
Employment intermediary will be defined as a person, other than the worker or the client, who carries on a business (whether or not with a view to profit and whether or not in conjunction with any other business) of supplying labour.

Where the worker is within the charge of the intermediaries legislation this measure will only apply to those contracts where a deemed employment payment is made, or would be made if all the individual’s remuneration was not being taken as employment income. In these circumstances the supervision, direction or control test will not be used.

And the draft at https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...t_clause-9.pdf says:

“339A Sections 338 and 339: employment intermediaries
(1) This section applies where an individual (“the worker”)—
(a) personally provides services (which are not excluded services)
to another person (“the client”), and
(b) the services are provided not under a contract directly between
the client and the worker but under arrangements involving an
employment intermediary.
(2) But this section does not apply if it is shown that the manner in which
the worker provides the services is not subject to (or to the right of)
supervision, direction or control by any person.

[LondonManc]

This publication seems relevant

Income Tax: employment intermediaries and relief for travel and subsistence



And the draft at https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...t_clause-9.pdf says:

That sounds like it's clobbering umbrellas.

"Employment intermediary will be defined as a person, other than the worker or the client, who carries on a business (whether or not with a view to profit and whether or not in conjunction with any other business) of supplying labour."

That part is a bit woolly about whether or not agencies count as intermediaries; if you have a business-to-business relationship with an agency and simply invoice them, then it seems that there is no individual involved for limited companies; sounds like sole traders could be caught though.

[Yorkie62]

T&S responses published

https://www.gov.uk/government/consul...nd-subsistence

Does not bode well...

"3.13 Although the government recognises that supervision, direction or control
is a subjective test, and that a minority of engagements will be hard to
categorise, it believes that clear guidance should help ensure businesses
and individuals are able to understand when a worker is under the right of
supervision, direction or control in the manner they undertake their work.
There is already a substantial amount of case law in this area, which will
further support HMRC’s guidance and the understanding of these terms.
HMRC will review the existing guidance on supervision, direction or
10
control and issue guidance for this measure before it comes into force in
2016.

3.14 The government is also confident that its current definition of the terms
will capture those whose work is akin to employees, without affecting
those who are akin to the self-employed. The government considers that
with clear guidance on these definitions, it will be easier to understand
where someone is not under supervision, direction or control.

3.15 It is important to note that the supervision, direction or control test being
proposed for use by employment intermediaries in relation to these
changes, will only be relevant for deciding eligibility for relief on travel and
subsistence for home to work travel. It will not impact on a worker’s
employment status, or wider employment rights"

But.. 1.8 of this document states:
1.8 The government does accept though that it would be burdensome for PSCs to be required to apply two separate tests for each of their contracts. The government will therefore amend its proposals, so that the new measure will only apply to a PSC’s contract when it falls within the intermediaries legislation, or would do if the worker was not receiving remuneration as employment income.

i.e. SDC will only apply if caught inside IR35

[LondonManc]

But.. 1.8 of this document states:
1.8 The government does accept though that it would be burdensome for PSCs to be required to apply two separate tests for each of their contracts. The government will therefore amend its proposals, so that the new measure will only apply to a PSC’s contract when it falls within the intermediaries legislation, or would do if the worker was not receiving remuneration as employment income.

i.e. SDC will only apply if caught inside IR35

Cool. I'm not a PSC because the tick box says so. As you were.

[PurpleGorilla]

WTF is a PSC?

[MarkT]

WTF is a PSC?

Particularly Solvent Contractor