PDA

View Full Version : Brollies want SDC for all



mudskipper
8th December 2015, 11:33
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/so-our-level-playing-field-stuart-marquis

'Cos it's only fair.

MrMarkyMark
8th December 2015, 11:36
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/so-our-level-playing-field-stuart-marquis

'Cos it's only fair.

It is. As part of the one size fits all society. :eyes

TheFaQQer
8th December 2015, 11:38
"Of course the thing that would join all this together would be if IR35 was revised so that status was only determined by SDC"

Thanks, Lisa :rolleyes:

Yorkie62
8th December 2015, 11:41
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/so-our-level-playing-field-stuart-marquis

'Cos it's only fair.

HMRC Divide and conquer perhaps?

The Spartan
8th December 2015, 11:50
Isn't working via a brolly almost the same as declaring yourself within IR35? I'm sure T&S is being stopped for those who have said they're within IR35, so isn't that equal?

TheFaQQer
8th December 2015, 11:53
Isn't working via a brolly almost the same as declaring yourself within IR35? I'm sure T&S is being stopped for those who have said they're within IR35, so isn't that equal?

Yes, but not content with that, the brollies seem to want to change the definition of IR35 to shaft those left behind.

MrMarkyMark
8th December 2015, 11:57
FTFY


the brollies seem to want to change the definition of IR35 to, both, protect and potentially increase their business.

The Spartan
8th December 2015, 11:57
Yes, but not content with that, the brollies seem to want to change the definition of IR35 to shaft those left behind.

They should really be taking issue with the Government after all it was their decision, also there's nothing to stop brolly users forming their own companies should they wish to do so.

jamesbrown
8th December 2015, 12:17
"Of course the thing that would join all this together would be if IR35 was revised so that status was only determined by SDC"

Thanks, Lisa :rolleyes:

Not sure where that quote originates, but AFAIK Lisa has argued against this as much as anyone. Personally, I'm not too concerned about SDC, although I know it's a minority view around here. However, none of this should be remotely surprising to anyone. On the contrary, I was very surprised by the AS in general and, specifically, by the absence of SDC as the qualifying condition for brollies in the original Blue Book, although I think it made sense not to preempt the IR35 consultation for PSCs. Nevertheless, the subsequent clarification tells us pretty much all we need to know about where this is heading. They aren't going to leave open an obvious pull-factor towards TMI from brollies, and some of the dual providers are already advertising to that effect; to some degree, we do it to ourselves (the wider contracting industry, that is).

TheFaQQer
8th December 2015, 14:39
Not sure where that quote originates, but AFAIK Lisa has argued against this as much as anyone.

The quote is Lisa's comment on the LinkedIn post.

jamesbrown
8th December 2015, 15:04
The quote is Lisa's comment on the LinkedIn post.

Odd, I couldn't find it when I searched. In any case, I'm pretty sure that's tongue in cheek (i.e. not being advocated); Lisa has argued the case against SDC (with me on the opposite side), but she's right that it would tie things together and that's where all this started (i.e. SDC is already used in other legislation). It's your smiley that threw me, as though Lisa was making a principled case for SDC or something...perhaps I misunderstood though.

TheFaQQer
8th December 2015, 15:23
Odd, I couldn't find it when I searched

How strange - here it is:

http://i1123.photobucket.com/albums/l556/TheFaqqer/Selection_047.jpg

mudskipper
8th December 2015, 15:39
Linkedin threading leaves a lot to be desired.

jamesbrown
8th December 2015, 15:39
How strange - here it is:

http://i1123.photobucket.com/albums/l556/TheFaqqer/Selection_047.jpg

Thanks. Just used a keyword search, but it was a collapsed thread.

Anyway, Lisa can answer for herself, but it would be odd if she's changed her opinion on SDC; I don't think she has.

Obviously, the comment is factually correct though. It would tie things together; that's what anyone arguing against SDC is up against. I think the main battle is elsewhere, as I've said many times before, namely with the clients deciding under duress of liability (i.e. "false employment"); in that sense, the criteria of SDC vs. IR35 is moot.

midlandlass
9th December 2015, 10:05
Yes, but not content with that, the brollies seem to want to change the definition of IR35 to shaft those left behind.

We are under the impression that even if working through a brolly, if the contractor is shown not to be under SDC (and probably will have to be declared by the end client), then there is the opportunity for T&S to be claimed under self assessment at the end of the year - but here's hoping today may give us all some answers. :ohwell

TheFaQQer
9th December 2015, 10:31
We are under the impression that even if working through a brolly, if the contractor is shown not to be under SDC (and probably will have to be declared by the end client), then there is the opportunity for T&S to be claimed under self assessment at the end of the year - but here's hoping today may give us all some answers. :ohwell

How does that tie into the idea that IR35 should be changed to SDC only, which is what Lisa posted?

GB9
9th December 2015, 10:35
How does that tie into the idea that IR35 should be changed to SDC only, which is what Lisa posted?

IMO, based upon some of her previous posts, Lisa believes we are all under SDC but just won't admit it.

Her business is also under threat.

MarkT
9th December 2015, 10:40
IMO, based upon some of her previous posts, Lisa believes we are all under SDC but just won't admit it.

Her business is also under threat.

If they create a new test (ESI) based on SDC, even a bloody plumber would theoretically be under SDC

TheFaQQer
9th December 2015, 10:46
If they create a new test (ESI) based on SDC, even a bloody plumber would theoretically be under SDC

Fear not - HMRC have brought in Oracle to build the new ESI tool :rolleyes:

MrMarkyMark
9th December 2015, 10:52
Well, seems like a couple of MPs are doing something...

MP's rally against T & S restrictions - Contractor Weekly (http://contractorweekly.com/contractor-news/tax-a-ir35-news/1269-mp-s-rally-against-t-s-restrictions?utm_source=Contractor+Weekly+Limited+ List&utm_campaign=ccdf4e6b4d-Contractor_Weekly_Issue_114_25_09_2013&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_b17da52d19-ccdf4e6b4d-293367825)

LondonManc
9th December 2015, 11:14
The solution is very simple. Change it from S, D OR C to S, D AND C

PurpleGorilla
9th December 2015, 11:23
All of which can be tested in the law courts; where up to now precious few contractors have fallen fowl of IR35.

TheFaQQer
9th December 2015, 11:26
All of which can be tested in the law courts; where up to now precious few contractors have fallen fowl of IR35.

Probably because HMRC are chicken.

:igmc:

bluemonkey71
9th December 2015, 11:29
Lets hope that rally ruffles some feathers

LondonManc
9th December 2015, 11:33
I don't eggspect much good to come of this.

PurpleGorilla
9th December 2015, 11:40
Lol!

LisaContractorUmbrella
9th December 2015, 13:12
Bonjour you lot :wave: I am actually on my hols but this thread has been brought to my attention so I thought I'd pop in to put your minds at rest that I haven;t changed my position. This was taken from a closed linked in group (needless to say I am not best chuffed that that can happen but ho hum). Myself and other umbrella company CEO's often post on there to discuss impending changes to legislation - much as I do on here.

The point I was making was not that I advocate SDC being applied to absolutely everything from here on in - merely that, from a point of view of a logical step forward, it would make sense that it was applied to everything. I have gained an idea of how HMRC think over the years and it seems to me that they have thought up the idea of having a single determining factor for status and have hung their hat on it - therefore it would make sense to them to apply it to IR35.

Hope that clears that up - can I go back to my hols now :ohwell

p.s. just had an email from Lucy - it's out!! So we will know what's what after disecting a couple of hundred pages of HMRC speak :frown

Zero Liability
9th December 2015, 13:28
The solution is very simple. Change it from S, D OR C to S, D AND C

Just from skimreading it, it looks like they have.

LondonManc
9th December 2015, 13:32
The point I was making was not that I advocate SDC being applied to absolutely everything from here on in - merely that, from a point of view of a logical step forward, it would make sense that it was applied to everything. I have gained an idea of how HMRC think over the years and it seems to me that they have thought up the idea of having a single determining factor for status and have hung their hat on it - therefore it would make sense to them to apply it to IR35.

Hope that clears that up - can I go back to my hols now :howell


Sorry Lisa, but applying SDC to everything would make no sense whatsoever. I cannot imagine many situations where a contractor is not subject to one of S, D OR C at some point in their contract, no matter what industry.

Painters and decorators - I want my hall, stairs and landing doing in magnolia with white skirting boards. Inside IR35

Plumber - I want this sink that I've bought fitting on that wall next to the bath.

Architect - I want a house designing that will fit on this plot of land. It must have four or five bedroom, two of which are ensuite and a garage with room for two cars.

Civil Engineer - We need a bridge over the river from this road to this road. It must be two lanes in both directions and should be fixed since no boats need to pass under it.

IT consultant - We need this suite of reports building. They must adhere to corporate colours and include the company logo in the top right corner.

LisaContractorUmbrella
9th December 2015, 13:38
Sorry Lisa, but applying SDC to everything would make no sense whatsoever. I cannot imagine many situations where a contractor is not subject to one of S, D OR C at some point in their contract, no matter what industry.

Painters and decorators - I want my hall, stairs and landing doing in magnolia with white skirting boards. Inside IR35

Plumber - I want this sink that I've bought fitting on that wall next to the bath.

Architect - I want a house designing that will fit on this plot of land. It must have four or five bedroom, two of which are ensuite and a garage with room for two cars.

Civil Engineer - We need a bridge over the river from this road to this road. It must be two lanes in both directions and should be fixed since no boats need to pass under it.

IT consultant - We need this suite of reports building. They must adhere to corporate colours and include the company logo in the top right corner.

I meant in this industry and from HMRC's point of view. Applying SDC to T&S and IR35 would simplify things for them - this will never be about simplifying things for us :emb

LondonManc
9th December 2015, 13:40
I meant in this industry and from HMRC's point of view. Applying SDC to T&S and IR35 would simplify things for them - this will never be about simplifying things for us :emb

It would make sense from a lunatic, broke, desperate-to-balance-the-books, short-termist idiot's point of view, I grant you. Given the early day motions that have gone in, it's clear that all MPs aren't as idiotically short-sighted as G.O.

LisaContractorUmbrella
9th December 2015, 13:42
It would make sense from a lunatic, broke, desperate-to-balance-the-books, short-termist idiot's point of view, I grant you. Given the early day motions that have gone in, it's clear that all MPs aren't as idiotically short-sighted as G.O.

well yes............:frown

I am using a MAC so please excuse any error of this sort i.e. the bad highlighting - sorry

LondonManc
9th December 2015, 13:50
It would make sense from a lunatic, broke, desperate-to-balance-the-books, short-termist idiot's point of view, I grant you. Given the early day motions that have gone in, it's clear that all MPs aren't as idiotically short-sighted as G.O.

well yes............:frown

I am using a MAC so please excuse any error of this sort i.e. the bad highlighting - sorry

No problem.

LondonManc
9th December 2015, 14:19
I've said it before and I'll say it again. If you're a disguised permie, you should have rights similar to a permie. If 80% or more of employee rights don't apply to a person fulfilling a given contract then they should be deemed outside IR35.

HMRC/HMG are not designing this to be a fair test; they're simply desperate for cash and this issue is too vague and non-mainstream to affect a lot of the knuckle-dragging electorate.

gables
9th December 2015, 14:20
Sorry Lisa, but applying SDC to everything would make no sense whatsoever. I cannot imagine many situations where a contractor is not subject to one of S, D OR C at some point in their contract, no matter what industry.

Painters and decorators - I want my hall, stairs and landing doing in magnolia with white skirting boards. Inside IR35

Plumber - I want this sink that I've bought fitting on that wall next to the bath.

Architect - I want a house designing that will fit on this plot of land. It must have four or five bedroom, two of which are ensuite and a garage with room for two cars.

Civil Engineer - We need a bridge over the river from this road to this road. It must be two lanes in both directions and should be fixed since no boats need to pass under it.

IT consultant - We need this suite of reports building. They must adhere to corporate colours and include the company logo in the top right corner.

You see, I don't think the above is SDC, those are requirements... from the other thread, I've bolded the bit in, er, bold


"3.13 Although the government recognises that supervision, direction or control
is a subjective test, and that a minority of engagements will be hard to
categorise, it believes that clear guidance should help ensure businesses
and individuals are able to understand when a worker is under the right of
supervision, direction or control in the manner they undertake their work.
There is already a substantial amount of case law in this area, which will
further support HMRC’s guidance and the understanding of these terms.
HMRC will review the existing guidance on supervision, direction or
10
control and issue guidance for this measure before it comes into force in
2016."

Surely SDC is about how you go about the work; you tell the painter what you want painted not how to paint it, you tell the civil engineer about the bridge not how to design it or build it, you tell the IT consultant the report requirements (look feel, output file type) not how he goes about creating it.

or am I missing something?

MrMarkyMark
9th December 2015, 14:30
FTFY


you tell the IT consultant to guess the report requirements (look feel, output file type) as you consider, you are far too busy to write them.

LondonManc
9th December 2015, 14:36
You see, I don't think the above is SDC, those are requirements... from the other thread, I've bolded the bit in, er, bold



Surely SDC is about how you go about the work; you tell the painter what you want painted not how to paint it, you tell the civil engineer about the bridge not how to design it or build it, you tell the IT consultant the report requirements (look feel, output file type) not how he goes about creating it.

or am I missing something?

My interpretation is that they are exercising direction over how it is delivered. It's a very woolly area, I agree.

gables
9th December 2015, 16:46
My interpretation is that they are exercising direction over how it is delivered. It's a very woolly area, I agree.

It is woolly yup, and interesting in the interpretations. If I'd told the painter which brush to use, whether to cut in first or after the main wall, how to prep the wall then I'd say I was controlling how to undertake the actual painting and to me that would fall under DC

GB9
9th December 2015, 17:15
It is woolly yup, and interesting in the interpretations. If I'd told the painter which brush to use, whether to cut in first or after the main wall, how to prep the wall then I'd say I was controlling how to undertake the actual painting and to me that would fall under DC

Case law supports your view.

Saying you want a white wall as opposed to a blue is not sdc as currently defined.

It might benefit a few to read the sdc definitions on here.

Yorkie62
9th December 2015, 18:07
I am not subject to, nor does my client have the right to, SDC as per my contract.

3.1 Neither the Company nor the Client shall be entitled to or seek to exercise any supervision, direction or control over the Contractor or the operatives in the manner of performance of the Project

Zero Liability
9th December 2015, 19:12
Just from skimreading it, it looks like they have.

So it looks like my skimreading skills failed. It is still OR. I'll take that flogging now.

GB9
10th December 2015, 11:13
I am not subject to, nor does my client have the right to, SDC as per my contract.

3.1 Neither the Company nor the Client shall be entitled to or seek to exercise any supervision, direction or control over the Contractor or the operatives in the manner of performance of the Project

Now that looks good.

No doubt HMRC would want to check working practises etc. but as a starting point it looks pretty solid.

End clients would just have to decide if that's what they wanted and say so up front.