• 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!

Thinking outloud - getting round the new PSC rules

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #11
    Originally posted by youngguy View Post
    What's a material? For example if I am a trainer and I produce a training manual as part of my delivery, is that a material?
    I'd say that's a tool to aid delivery. Not core of the delivery so no.
    'CUK forum personality of 2011 - Winner - Yes really!!!!

    Comment


      #12
      Originally posted by northernladuk View Post
      I'd say that's a tool to aid delivery. Not core of the delivery so no.
      And I'd agree with that - HMRC are probably thinking about 'raw materials'.

      But I bet that's the approach some will try to take to wriggle around the rules, dressing up deliverables in different ways to argue the case.

      Comment


        #13
        Originally posted by northernladuk View Post
        I'd say that's a tool to aid delivery. Not core of the delivery so no.
        I think in that case it goes back to what exactly are they paying for. Bringing someone in to run a training means paying someone £500 a day to use something that's taken them x years to learn...

        The issue here is that PSC assumes everyone is a bum on seat contractor doing the same job as other people in the building. Given that I'm both the subject matter expert, the specialist and the architect on the system what they are paying for is not me as a developer (that's only 50% of the money say) its the fact that I'm the expert that makes me worth the amount they have to pay for me....
        Last edited by eek; 7 September 2016, 12:36.
        merely at clientco for the entertainment

        Comment


          #14
          Originally posted by youngguy View Post
          And I'd agree with that - HMRC are probably thinking about 'raw materials'.

          But I bet that's the approach some will try to take to wriggle around the rules, dressing up deliverables in different ways to argue the case.
          You and your betting. You'd have lost everything by now with the number of times you take a sweeping bet without thinking it through.

          99.99% don't deliver anything to even think about this let alone use it as wiggle room. The agents also won't understand it so won't help.
          'CUK forum personality of 2011 - Winner - Yes really!!!!

          Comment


            #15
            Originally posted by northernladuk View Post
            You and your betting. You'd have lost everything by now with the number of times you take a sweeping bet without thinking it through.

            99.99% don't deliver anything to even think about this let alone use it as wiggle room. The agents also won't understand it so won't help.
            Haha, that's why I haven't retired yet, I lost it all!

            I have seen similar stuff before. When G cloud hit and bunches of contractors started being part of managed services to duck certain rules. They did try to suggest (and even capitalise) deliverables were materials such as plans, training material etc.

            Comment


              #16
              Originally posted by youngguy View Post
              What's a material? For example if I am a trainer and I produce a training manual as part of my delivery, is that a material?
              Yes, are Training Materials, and it's part of the deliverables.

              Comment


                #17
                Originally posted by eek View Post
                I think in that case it goes back to what exactly are they paying for. Bringing someone in to run a training means paying someone £500 a day to use something that's taken them x years to learn...

                The issue here is that PSC assumes everyone is a bum on seat contractor doing the same job as other people in the building. Given that I'm both the subject matter expert, the specialist and the architect on the system what they are paying for is not me as a developer (that's only 50% of the money say) its the fact that I'm the expert that makes me worth the amount they have to pay for me....
                If you have a product you then sell or customise for every client, doesn't that make you a provider/supplier rather than a Bos contractor?

                Comment


                  #18
                  Originally posted by youngguy View Post
                  If you have a product you then sell or customise for every client, doesn't that make you a provider/supplier rather than a Bos contractor?
                  Not yet but you can see where I'm aiming for. In this case the material would be a fundamental part of the finished product, no different from the COTS product that is being customised in the first place...

                  Originally posted by youngguy View Post
                  Haha, that's why I haven't retired yet, I lost it all!

                  I have seen similar stuff before. When G cloud hit and bunches of contractors started being part of managed services to duck certain rules. They did try to suggest (and even capitalise) deliverables were materials such as plans, training material etc.
                  How did that work out?
                  merely at clientco for the entertainment

                  Comment


                    #19
                    Originally posted by northernladuk View Post
                    I'd say that's a tool to aid delivery. Not core of the delivery so no.
                    If the training manuals are handed over at the end and an NDA signed (as Ab Initio do with their manuals), then you could argue that the manuals are a high value deliverable. Granted, it would have to be an exceptional case, but eek is trying to point at exceptions here.
                    The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world that he didn't exist

                    Comment


                      #20
                      Originally posted by eek View Post
                      How did that work out?
                      You know the answer to that. You are just being naughty.

                      Just more guesswork and fantasy with no basis or actual argument as usual. It's getting very tedious and taking more time to correct his statements than it is to focus on the actual topic. #nothelping.
                      'CUK forum personality of 2011 - Winner - Yes really!!!!

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X