ET/EAT

[JohntheBike]

The whole ET to fight off IR35 idea was done over a decade ago. IANTO vs Hewlett Packard if I remember correctly.

yes, and others, including those that opposed the principle in the past, are now adopting my lead. Note the Winchester and Elbourn cases.

[northernladuk]

yes, and others, including those that opposed the principle in the past, are now adopting my lead. Note the Winchester and Elbourn cases.

They are nothing like your case and they are over a decade later so are not 'adopting your lead' at all. Deluded little man.

[JohntheBike]

They are nothing like your case and they are over a decade later so are not 'adopting your lead' at all. Deluded little man.

as I've said many times, the lack of knowledge about any issue leads to invalid conclusions. I've been working with other organisations in the fight against IR35. So please restrain your comments to what you actually know about.

[northernladuk]

as I've said many times, the lack of knowledge about any issue leads to invalid conclusions. I've been working with other organisations in the fight against IR35. So please restrain your comments to what you actually know about.

Nope, I'm pretty sure it's quite a bit over 10 years later and a very different to your situation. I'm also pretty sure that thinking every case is following your lead nearly a generation later is deluded.

What lead did they follow BTW. Go yo court expecting to lose, twice. Nope I don't think that's what they were doing.

[JohntheBike]

Nope, I'm pretty sure it's quite a bit over 10 years later and a very different to your situation. I'm also pretty sure that thinking every case is following your lead nearly a generation later is deluded.

What lead did they follow BTW. Go yo court expecting to lose, twice. Nope I don't think that's what they were doing.

"What lead did they follow BTW"

They went to the ET to settle an issue which was essentially IR35 related. Which is exactly what I did. I'm surprised that such an intelligent person as you can't see that. And, as I've said, I've been working with some organisations to project this idea.

[northernladuk]

"What lead did they follow BTW"

They went to the ET to settle an issue which was essentially IR35 related. Which is exactly what I did.

Wow.. Just wow. Anyone going to court over anything IR35 related in the last 20 years and anytime going forward is following your lead? You've got to be kidding right? I'll bet every penny I have neither people involved had a bleeding clue who you are or what you did but feel free to try take the credit.

And, as I've said, I've been working with some organisations to project this idea.

This does not bode well for the future of contracting at all.

[JohntheBike]

Wow.. Just wow. Anyone going to court over anything IR35 related in the last 20 years and anytime going forward is following your lead? You've got to be kidding right? I'll bet every penny I have neither people involved had a bleeding clue who you are or what you did but feel free to try take the credit.
This does not bode well for the future of contracting at all.

"Anyone going to court over anything IR35 related in the last 20 years and anytime going forward is following your lead?"

I haven't claimed that. How many cases other than the Winchester and Elbourn cases have been taken to the ET, not the !st Tier Tribunal (Tax Commissioners Courts) for what are essentially IR35 related issues? You do seem to have a knack of distorting what I'm saying.

"This does not bode well for the future of contracting at all"

Which tells me that you are one of the IBOYA brigade to which anything related to the ET is an anathema. But you seem oblivious to the fact that many contractors are essentially BOS, just as I was, and are the prime targets for IR35. You are only interested in protecting your own interests, which clearly do not coincide with many of those in contracting.