You're probably not going to like this - we certainly don't

[DotasScandal]

How many that are affected are current IPSE members? You said it was a "great many" - is that more than 10? more than 100? more than 1000? more than 10000?

Probably somewhere between 1000 and 10000. Most of those who spoke to us and are still contracting are now Ltd Co. and IPSE members. Big Group paints a similiar picture.

[missinggreenfields]

Probably somewhere between 1000 and 10000. Most of those who spoke to us and are still contracting are now Ltd Co. and IPSE members. Big Group paints a similiar picture.

Curious that if it's close to 10000 that with that volume, no single candidate for CC ever has mentioned it, no board candidate has ever mentioned it, and there's been near silence on the PCG / IPSE forums for as long as I can remember - surely if nearly half the membership are affected someone would have made more of an issue and demanded action.

Hopefully, some of those thousands will be pushing more for you all - if I was affected, I'd be disappointed that no-one has considered it before

[DotasScandal]

Curious that if it's close to 10000 that with that volume, no single candidate for CC ever has mentioned it, no board candidate has ever mentioned it, and there's been near silence on the PCG / IPSE forums for as long as I can remember - surely if nearly half the membership are affected someone would have made more of an issue and demanded action.
Hopefully, some of those thousands will be pushing more for you all - if I was affected, I'd be disappointed that no-one has considered it before

First, just like only a tiny tiny proportion of contractors at large frequent the CUK forums, we'd hazard that only a minority of IPSE members use / are aware of the forums at all.
Second, we understand that Big Group have approached IPSE, and that IPSE is adopting a "elephant in the room" approach to the whole matter.
And yes, this is a cause of disappointment.

[Hobosapien]

The pension "thing" is an example of why this just won't work. Currently, if you're IR35 caught, you can pay as much as you want into your SIPP as a company contribution (up to the 40K limit).

By paying in post tax, you get your tax relief, but you don't get NI back, so you would be considerably 'worse off' that IR35 caught today.

How about fighting for your employment rights, including a nice final salary scheme...

HMRC will see this new approach as closing that loophole where as a disguised employee you should be paying PAYE/NI on the full amount. By them moving responsibility further up the payment chain they take that option away so in a way it's their view of tax simplification.

[LondonManc]

HMRC will see this new approach as closing that loophole where as a disguised employee you should be paying PAYE/NI on the full amount. By them moving responsibility further up the payment chain they take that option away so in a way it's their view of tax simplification.

Oh it is simplification ; they can screw you over in far simpler ways. They get one payment from PS dept and not lots from different people who don't know whether they're inside IR35 or not.

[missinggreenfields]

First, just like only a tiny tiny proportion of contractors at large frequent the CUK forums, we'd hazard that only a minority of IPSE members use / are aware of the forums at all.

But if there are 10000 IPSE members who are affected, that's probably close to half the membership. You'd have thought that one (maybe even two?) of those would post something on the forums, or stand for CC or stand for board -if that many are affected, surely it would be a walk-on and then you'd be able to change things from inside

Second, we understand that Big Group have approached IPSE, and that IPSE is adopting a "elephant in the room" approach to the whole matter.

Informative - I've seen things written about how there have been talks but nothing formal, but if that is true then that must be incredibly frustrating for the great number of IPSE members who are caught. But if you want IPSE to do something then why aren't you pushing them to do something?

And yes, this is a cause of disappointment.

[missinggreenfields]

HMRC research finds 'resistance' to proposals to shift contractor tax compliance burden - The Register

[DotasScandal]

But if there are 10000 IPSE members who are affected, that's probably close to half the membership. You'd have thought that one (maybe even two?) of those would post something on the forums, or stand for CC or stand for board -if that many are affected, surely it would be a walk-on and then you'd be able to change things from inside

Informative - I've seen things written about how there have been talks but nothing formal, but if that is true then that must be incredibly frustrating for the great number of IPSE members who are caught. But if you want IPSE to do something then why aren't you pushing them to do something?

Never said there are "10000 IPSE members who are affected"... but play candid / stupid if you like.

We are not "pushing them to do something" because as mentioned earlier, IPSE are not interested, and we are already busy enough as it is fighting this through other avenues.

[missinggreenfields]

Never said there are "10000 IPSE members who are affected"... but play candid / stupid if you like.

We are not "pushing them to do something" because as mentioned earlier, IPSE are not interested, and we are already busy enough as it is fighting this through other avenues.

No - you said "Probably somewhere between 1000 and 10000" so let's go with your lowest estimate.

1000 members - if that many are affected, then I'd have thoguht that at least one could / would say "I think this is terrible and I want to do something about it", but each to their own.

Seems strange to be moaning that IPSE aren't going anything, but none of the "great many" affected members (and I don't think for a second that there are over 1000 members who are affected) want to do the simple thing of asking / pushing the organisation that they belong to to do something to me.

I'd be surprised if 1000 members even voted in the elections, so it would be dead easy to write a statement that says "I'm a scheme user and IPSE should do more - if you're affected then vote for me" and get elected by the great many affected members. It would also send a clear message to the management that they should do something.

[Fred Bloggs]

IIRC, the IPSE party line is that they always advised against using schemes. So, if you used one anyway, then you were always on your own.