Thinking outloud - getting round the new PSC rules

[eek]

Now my plan for getting round the new PSC rules is very simple. Write code, creating a set of packages that I can sell to others and stop being a bum on seat contractor but I've been thinking (dangerous I know).

The one get out clause in the new PSC rules is where materials are provided and those materials make up over 20% of the value of the project - this gives me an idea.

Now the question is would the following work...

1) licence some of the packages (discussed above) on a per developer licence - using the bits that save developers large amounts of time by removing the need to develop a lot of custom code.
2) provided a means for live production licences to be resold based on the complexity of the project (say at 20-25% of the contract cost)...
3) ideally pocket a bit of 2 for myself....

Anyone care to comment...

[northernladuk]

But aren't you going to have to come in under a different framework for that? Agents aren't going to understand how all that works. I'd say you might have a square peg solution but in most case the client and agent want a round peg contractor?

That said this will be highly specific to you and won't work for PMs, service types etc won't it?

[LondonManc]

What's a PSC?

[eek]

But aren't you going to have to come in under a different framework for that? Agents aren't going to understand how all that works. I'd say you might have a square peg solution but in most case the client and agent want a round peg contractor?

That said this will be highly specific to you and won't work for PMs, service types etc won't it?

Agreed its highly specific to me - but the work I do usually goes through a group of about 5 specialist agents / agencies.... So in my case it could be a very nice workaround for them and potentially very profitable for me (their contractors can use it, just give me 0.5% commission on the contracts)..

[eek]

What's a PSC?

Public sector contracting

[jamesbrown]

Personally, I think this will be the first thing to disappear following the consultation. It was roundly rejected as a useless test, IIRC, and I don't think it's material to what they're trying to do.

[eek]

Personally, I think this will be the first thing to disappear following the consultation. It was roundly rejected as a useless test, IIRC, and I don't think it's material to what they're trying to do.

Agreed but my immediate interest stems from the fact I was about to launch something - and were I to do so I probably wouldn't be able to use this licence mechanism afterwards...

So were the rule to still exists, is it a goer.....

[jamesbrown]

So were the rule to still exists, is it a goer.....

Honestly, I don't know, as it's rather a detailed question. The consultation was phrased in terms of materials "consumed", but I don't know whether that's significant; the examples certainly alluded to that IIRC. However, the more pertinent question is probably how the client or agent would respond in edge cases. Unless this scenario was directly addressed in guidance, it would be a brave client/agent.

[eek]

Honestly, I don't know, as it's rather a detailed question. The consultation was phrased in terms of materials "consumed", but I don't know whether that's significant; the examples certainly alluded to that IIRC. However, the more pertinent question is probably how the client or agent would respond in edge cases. Unless this scenario was directly addressed in guidance, it would be a brave client/agent.

I think you've actually answered my question there - hold things back and wait and see...

[youngguy]

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?