November 22nd - The death of contracting as we know it

[Fred Bloggs]

That’s why I agree with moving ir35 decisions to the client prior to advertising. The simple fact is I won’t take an inside ir35 contract.

And I will accept that it may reduce the market I’m targeting but in reality I don’t care - the customer is likely to get what they deserve.

If, at last, the new rules put all those inside IR35 who should have been all along, then in my analysis this can only be a good thing. Then, for the small minority who remain, when you engage on a gig in a true B2B relationship, the client taking the risk of the IR35 determination, everyone is happy. The contractor no longer needs the ridiculous parasitic overheads of IR35 insurance and the like. For those on a B2B contract, it is a happy outcome. Ofcourse, if as the majority are, you are really a disguised temporary employee then belly ache all you like, you had a good run but now it's over. Suck it up.

[meanttobeworking]

If, at last, the new rules put all those inside IR35 who should have been all along, then in my analysis this can only be a good thing. Then, for the small minority who remain, when you engage on a gig in a true B2B relationship, the client taking the risk of the IR35 determination, everyone is happy. The contractor no longer needs the ridiculous parasitic overheads of IR35 insurance and the like. For those on a B2B contract, it is a happy outcome. Ofcourse, if as the majority are, you are really a disguised temporary employee then belly ache all you like, you had a good run but now it's over. Suck it up.

You seem to be confident in your assessment of everyone else’s IR35 status - what is it that gives you the clarity that everyone else lacks?

[Fred Bloggs]

You seem to be confident in your assessment of everyone else’s IR35 status - what is it that gives you the clarity that everyone else lacks?

Seriously? OK take a look around your office. And try to count those who really do have a B2B relationship with the client. How many did you count? None at all? One or two out of a hundred?

[northernladyuk]

Seriously? OK take a look around your office. And try to count those who really do have a B2B relationship with the client. How many did you count? None at all? One or two out of a hundred?

In terms of any one factor out of MoO, D&C and SoR or in terms of some alternative determinants you've decided on.

Turn it around and ask how many contractors really do have an employer to employee relationship?

[ChimpMaster]

In terms of any one factor out of MoO, D&C and SoR or in terms of some alternative determinants you've decided on.

Turn it around and ask how many contractors really do have an employer to employee relationship?

Eye of the beholder.

Ask CEST and 90% of contractors are deemed employees. That's how HMRC will see it.

Ask your client and they will say you are a deemed employee; it's easier to squash an ant than fight an elephant.

Ask yourself and you'll realise your opinion will count for nothing in this new world.

[meanttobeworking]

Seriously? OK take a look around your office. And try to count those who really do have a B2B relationship with the client. How many did you count? None at all? One or two out of a hundred?

That's the whole problem with IR35 though isn't it. There are (in my view) a minority of people that are CLEARLY well outside. There are (in my view) a number that are CLEARLY well inside. But there is (in my view) a much larger group that sit in the grey area between those two extremes who are left to try and weigh up their status based on some pretty fluffy principles. And some of those people come here to try and get clarity. When I look around my office, I see a range of people that seem to fall into all of these categories, and could be further split into those that know IR35 and those that don't.

It seems from your previous post(s) that (in your view) you're in that first minority that are clearly outside, and that anyone below that bar is (in your view) inside IR35, which totally misses out the people in the grey area. But perhaps you're just a victim of misunderstanding as we can't hear your tone of voice. I certainly don't doubt your knowledge and interest in the subject, I know you're a regular poster.

Are you saying that in your view that the guy sitting next to me that got sent home the other week without being paid because the work dried up is inside because he sometimes helps out on projects that aren't listed in his contract? He doesn't look at everything through a pair of IR35 spectacles (sometimes I'm jealous of him!), or always try to operate like a true B2B relationship, but does that make him inside? I don't expect a yes or no answer, it's just a question that tries to demonstrate it's not quite as black and white as your post makes out. And I'm genuinely interested in your answer

[Jog On]

Wouldn't surprise me to see some really valuable/irreplaceable contractors getting outside contracts because the client simply cannot do without them - a bit like those employees in banks that walk around with long hair, shorts and flip flops.

Then the more middle of the road and 'replaceable' ones will get forced inside or walk a la forced rate reduction model. In practice it will have nothing to do with actual working arrangements or status.

If they absolutely cannot do without you - you will get the contract you want - or a significant rate increase to compensate.

[meanttobeworking]

Wouldn't surprise me to see some really valuable/irreplaceable contractors getting outside contracts because the client simply cannot do without them

Bang goes your RoS then. Another IR35 paradox.

[Fred Bloggs]

OK, as you're interested in my semi random thoughts, I'll try my best, where Hector has failed the last almost 18 years

That's the whole problem with IR35 though isn't it.

Pretty much, yes.

There are (in my view) a minority of people that are CLEARLY well outside.

Again, pretty much, yes. I've been in both camps. But as a niche technical specialist, as another poster says,
am I "so specialised" that my RoS is a sham?

There are (in my view) a number that are CLEARLY well inside.

I would go further than that, but, generally, yes, I agree. Though I would tend to say a large majority.

But there is (in my view) a much larger group that sit in the grey area between those two extremes who are left to try and weigh up their status based on some pretty fluffy principles.

This is really the same group as above. The simple (to me) fact is that distinguishing between disguised employees and contractors has been horrendously difficult in actual practice. It is this fact alone that has kept you out of IR35. PCG and others did a sterling job in maintaining that situation.The HMG and HMRC have now learned to not to try nailing jelly to the wall any more. It became an untenable situation as fine lines between in and out of IR35 got ever finer. In one case, a person started off outside and then was found to have moved to inside later on. A crass situation.

And some of those people come here to try and get clarity.

There is no clarity. That's why you stayed outside IR35 for so long. Lack of clarity worked in your favour for nearly 18 years.

When I look around my office, I see a range of people that seem to fall into all of these categories, and could be further split into those that know IR35 and those that don't.

See above.

It seems from your previous post(s) that (in your view) you're in that first minority that are clearly outside, and that anyone below that bar is (in your view) inside IR35, which totally misses out the people in the grey area.

I have been both. If I worked against a purchase order for a client, I was outside. If I worked on a project as one of a number of other people doing the same thing on a standard agency deal, I was probably inside. But I got away with it like everyone else did.

But perhaps you're just a victim of misunderstanding as we can't hear your tone of voice.

Certainly an issue on BB's, I agree.

I certainly don't doubt your knowledge and interest in the subject, I know you're a regular poster.

There are many, many people here just as or more knowledgeable. I hold a semi controversial view, but it makes it no more or less valid than anyone else's. I am used to being in a minority of one in my professional life, so it's nothing unusual for me. I hope some people stop and think a second that's all. The repeat non-thinkers are on my ignore list anyway. As I probably am on theirs.

Are you saying that in your view that the guy sitting next to me that got sent home the other week without being paid because the work dried up is inside because he sometimes helps out on projects that aren't listed in his contract?

It's just one factor isn't it? In a marginal case it might swing a favourable verdict. In another, it could be part of a rock solid defence. In another case, it could be that the guy was otherwise a de-facto employee. That's part of the problem.

He doesn't look at everything through a pair of IR35 spectacles (sometimes I'm jealous of him!), or always try to operate like a true B2B relationship, but does that make him inside?

I think you can see that in isolation, no it doesn't. If you are in a typical office based project environment it is always going to be hard to give a true B2B service. The client just wants a bum on the seat delivering stuff to schedule and quality. The client is not interested in a B2B relationship. Just on delivery.

I don't expect a yes or no answer,

I hope you aren't disappointed then.

it's just a question that tries to demonstrate it's not quite as black and white as your post makes out.

HMG and HMRC are doing their darndest to bring in a black and white scenario. Since the jelly nailing approach has failed. They've learned that they need to take a different approach. If the looking around the office approach shows that everyone looks the same, and everyone acts the same, and everyone fails the on line status tool, then you're caught. Simple. And the better defined your role is,
the easier it is for HMRC to match you up against the kind of statutory definition of what a contractor is that's being called for in some quarters.

And I'm genuinely interested in your answer

[meanttobeworking]

But as a niche technical specialist...

That niche wouldn't be Advanced CUK Forum Post Formatting would it? I'm impressed

Taking on board everything you've said, for me it boils down to this...

If it's as simple as most contracts and contractors being inside, then it should be far simpler for HMRC and whoever else to make a clear distinction as to who that elite group is that can operate outside. "Outside IR35" PS gigs on Jobserve would be a) few and far between (which they're not) and b) distinctly different from both the Inside PS roles and all the Private Sector ones too (which they're not). It shouldn't be about fine lines or nuances. The fact that, today, it IS about fine lines and nuances means that nobody really knows for sure, and nobody wants to draw a line for fear of the 'other side' simply organising their affairs to place themselves nicely on the side of the line they want to be on.

In short, nobody knows anything for sure. Good job, HMRC.