Was talking about this with a someone at clientco earlier, and it seems to me that any security-cleared contractor must be bang-to-rights inside IR35, as they obviously can't claim the right of substitution.
Even in the unlikely event they could claim as a substitute some other contractor, security-cleared to at least the same level, would any organisation demanding security clearance ever consent to a condition like that even in theory?
Or is substitution not always a completely conclusive open-and-shut indicator of being IR35-caught? (I am pretty sure it is.)
Even in the unlikely event they could claim as a substitute some other contractor, security-cleared to at least the same level, would any organisation demanding security clearance ever consent to a condition like that even in theory?
Or is substitution not always a completely conclusive open-and-shut indicator of being IR35-caught? (I am pretty sure it is.)
Comment