New ruler and PSC

[pscont]

One of the big 4 consultancies announced today that every LTD contractor working under PSC will not be affected by the new rules.
I am not even sure I fully understand what PSC is, but they confirmed the contractor is LTD.
I am missing something, but what?
So how can this be true?

[RonBW]

So how can this be true?

Various possibilities:

• The consultancy does not use limited company contractors for public sector work
• The consultancy uses limited company contractors for public sector work but only with agreed deliverables rather than a pseudo-employee
• The consultancy and end client have reviewed all engagements with the public sector and obtained a determination that you are not covered by the new rules
• The consultancy and end client have reviewed all engagements with the public sector and obtained a determination that you are covered by the new rules but are outside IR35

I'm sure that there are more, but those are the immediate ones that I can think of.

Get the agreement in writing in the contract (or keep the email) and keep on billing.

[pscont]

What is PSC?
as for the points

1. yes it does.
2. not sure if this is the case, might be.
3. how can this be?
4. ir35 is still not determined.

[RonBW]

What is PSC?

Personal Service Company. This has no legal standing, but is the term that HMRC, HMG et al like to use to refer to a contractor limited company.

as for the points

1. yes it does.
2. not sure if this is the case, might be.
3. how can this be?
4. ir35 is still not determined.

If you are concerned about it, I would suggest asking your client and getting their assurances in writing (preferably in the contract) - they will be able to explain how they have come to this decision better than anyone's guesses on a forum might be able to come up with.

[northernladuk]

What is PSC?

as for the points

2. not sure if this is the case, might be.

Pretty key so if you don't know you'll not get an answer.

3. how can this be?

The contractor is not engaged as a bum on seat as per the examples in the original documentation.

4. ir35 is still not determined.

But you said they aren't affected? So carry on outside as before. Or do you mean out of scope of the legislation which is item 3 no?

[BackupBoy]

Which one?

[WordIsBond]

Various possibilities:

<snip>

I'm sure that there are more, but those are the immediate ones that I can think of.

You forgot, "They're talking out of their backside" as a possibility.

Various possibilities:
Get the agreement in writing in the contract (or keep the email) and keep on billing.

+1. If they are wrong, they pay, not you. As long as you have it in writing, you should be in good shape.

[pscont]

as for the points


Pretty key so if you don't know you'll not get an answer.

The contractor is not engaged as a bum on seat as per the examples in the original documentation.

But you said they aren't affected? So carry on outside as before. Or do you mean out of scope of the legislation which is item 3 no?

They were pretty useless at the presentation but said if you under PSC you are out of scope of the legislation.
In the same time you are still LTD, and to me it is more like bum on seat rather than anything else. I don't know the fine details of the contract between PSB and the consultancy. It is about delivering software (going for 2+ years), so in theory it could be the same as the NHS hospital building project in the examples.

[northernladuk]

They were pretty useless at the presentation but said if you under PSC you are out of scope of the legislation.
In the same time you are still LTD, and to me it is more like bum on seat rather than anything else. I don't know the fine details of the contract between PSB and the consultancy. It is about delivering software (going for 2+ years), so in theory it could be the same as the NHS hospital building project in the examples.

I'd be very wary of that assumption. We've already had someone come on here using that exact example to try and justify a bum on seat contractor and it was painful to watch unfold. You could be right but I don't know if you fully understand what you do and engagements with clients. The other guy certainly didn't.

I'd just say delivering software is not necessarily the same as delivering a packaged service... but as always the devil is in the details.

[malvolio]

What looks like a rough rule of thumb is if you are working alongside the client's team to deliver a project, you are likely caught. If you are working with a company on a complete turnkey solution for eventual delivery to a client then you aren't. If you are working alongside the client's people to deliver a BaU service you are caught, if you are working for a fully outsourced service supplier then you probably aren't.

There are shades and details within that but that is the broad picture that seems to be emerging.