Umbrella offering expenses?!

[northernladuk]

Yep - if the contract is outside IR35 and you are not subject to SDC and wish to use an umbrella then you could claim expenses.

However, the umbrellas that push expenses don't use the outside distinction and have a questionnaire that is surprisingly easy to pass given the hints they provide...

Sane umbrellas won't touch the idea with a barge-pole as HMRC investigations aren't fun and will result in a large cost even if you are 100% in the right.

Gotcha. That's what I thought.

[lucyclarityumbrella]

Yep - if the contract is outside IR35 and you are not subject to SDC and wish to use an umbrella then you could claim expenses.

So my conversation with HMRC back when IR35 came into the public sector was along these lines...

If inside IR35, likelihood is that the contractor would fail an SDC test (not that an official test actually exists), on a rare occasion that the end client would declare that the contractor is not under SDC, then the contractor "may" be able to claim these back via self assessment at the end of the year.

[northernladuk]

So my conversation with HMRC back when IR35 came into the public sector was along these lines...

If inside IR35, likelihood is that the contractor would fail an SDC test (not that an official test actually exists), on a rare occasion that the end client would declare that the contractor is not under SDC, then the contractor "may" be able to claim these back via self assessment at the end of the year.

Which the less scrupulous umbrellas are using as a sales tactic to get clueless contractors interested?

[eek]

Which the less scrupulous umbrellas are using as a sales tactic to get clueless contractors interested?

Yep including some names that I thought would be above such things...

[lucyclarityumbrella]

Surprised????? Honestly????

[eek]

Surprised????? Honestly????

Short term gains against potential long term loss in reputation, not that anyone really has any reputation worth protection beyond a couple of exceptions.

[hobnob]

Looking for a new brolly now and noticed a lot of them are still saying "you might be able to get travelling expenses".

As an example, I had an inside contract (via an umbrella) with an MSP. I.e. various other organisations had outsourced the IT to them. If I drove out to a client site to replace their router, I could claim the travelling expenses between the MSP's office and the client site (45p/mile). However, I couldn't claim anything to get from my home to the MSP's office.
NB The mileage expenses were on top of my daily rate, i.e. this didn't reduce the amount of tax/NI that I paid.

I think that NLUK is correct: the umbrella has chosen their words carefully, to say something that is technically true, but potentially misleading.

[eek]

As an example, I had an inside contract (via an umbrella) with an MSP. I.e. various other organisations had outsourced the IT to them. If I drove out to a client site to replace their router, I could claim the travelling expenses between the MSP's office and the client site (45p/mile). However, I couldn't claim anything to get from my home to the MSP's office.
NB The mileage expenses were on top of my daily rate, i.e. this didn't reduce the amount of tax/NI that I paid.

I think that NLUK is correct: the umbrella has chosen their words carefully, to say something that is technically true, but potentially misleading.

Rechargeable expenses are allowed - the issue is none rechargeable (sustenance) expenses