Originally posted by youngguy
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!
Thinking outloud - getting round the new PSC rules
Collapse
X
-
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!!!!
-
And I'd agree with that - HMRC are probably thinking about 'raw materials'.Originally posted by northernladuk View PostI'd say that's a tool to aid delivery. Not core of the delivery so no.
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
-
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...Originally posted by northernladuk View PostI'd say that's a tool to aid delivery. Not core of the delivery so no.
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 entertainmentComment
-
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.Originally posted by youngguy View PostAnd 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.
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
-
Haha, that's why I haven't retired yet, I lost it all!Originally posted by northernladuk View PostYou 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.
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
-
Yes, are Training Materials, and it's part of the deliverables.Originally posted by youngguy View PostWhat'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?Comment
-
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?Originally posted by eek View PostI 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....Comment
-
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 PostIf 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?
How did that work out?Originally posted by youngguy View PostHaha, 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.merely at clientco for the entertainmentComment
-
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.Originally posted by northernladuk View PostI'd say that's a tool to aid delivery. Not core of the delivery so no.The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world that he didn't existComment
-
You know the answer to that. You are just being naughty.Originally posted by eek View PostHow did that work out?
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
- 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

Comment