Originally posted by SueEllen
View Post
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Brummie calls out NLUK on IR35
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by Brummie View PostYou could try dictionary.cambridge.org. Just a suggestion"You’re just a bad memory who doesn’t know when to go away" JRComment
-
Originally posted by Brummie View PostYou could try dictionary.cambridge.org. Just a suggestion
Your written English is beyond dreadful and that's before we even get to the dubious content.The Chunt of Chunts.Comment
-
Originally posted by Brummie View PostYou could try dictionary.cambridge.org. Just a suggestion
cretin
noun [ C ] UK /ˈkret.ɪn/ US /ˈkriː.t̬ən/ offensive
a very stupid personComment
-
Originally posted by Brummie View PostMost of the contractors come and ask the question know what the law states. They are here for the practical point of view. Its the difference between avoidance and evasion.
I'll leave others to judge if you fit into that category.Comment
-
Original thread derailed, so all off topic moved to here.Down with racism. Long live miscegenation!Comment
-
If anyone does not like NLUK's advice, they are free to ask for their money back.
NLUK - it serves you right. No good deed goes unpunished. You should tell these people with IR35 questions to ask their accountant.....Comment
-
Originally posted by Brummie View PostMost of the contractors come and ask the question know what the law states. They are here for the practical point of view. Its the difference between avoidance and evasion.
99% of all contractors are de facto IR35.
The game you play is judging whether you will be extremely unlucky and get investigated. And then be extremely, extremely unlucky for QDOS not to get you off.
To me it's entirely a question of risk appetite.
A typical dialogue is
OP " If I take a contract where <such-and-such>, what should I do?"
NLUK " You will be deemed to be <whatever>"
Of course the truth is you can do what you like. Nothing happens until your return goes in. Then some process (nobody knows the details) picks out a tiny amount of cases to probe. I worked at HMRC for a while and my sense was they have extremely limited capabilities and freedom to search data to identify suspicious behaviours.
We do know people do get picked upon although I've never met anybody who has or who knows anyone who has. And we know some of them get done although the figures IPSE last produced showed the chances of getting off are almost 100% as long as you go into battle fully tooled up.
However I've said this a number of times on here (ie 'what proof have you got for your barrack room prognostications?') and nobody wants to know.
You might as well give up now."Don't part with your illusions; when they are gone you may still exist, but you have ceased to live" Mark TwainComment
-
Originally posted by Cirrus View PostTotally agree with you, Brummie.
99% of all contractors are de facto IR35.
The game you play is judging whether you will be extremely unlucky and get investigated. And then be extremely, extremely unlucky for QDOS not to get you off.
To me it's entirely a question of risk appetite.
A typical dialogue is
OP " If I take a contract where <such-and-such>, what should I do?"
NLUK " You will be deemed to be <whatever>"
Of course the truth is you can do what you like. Nothing happens until your return goes in. Then some process (nobody knows the details) picks out a tiny amount of cases to probe. I worked at HMRC for a while and my sense was they have extremely limited capabilities and freedom to search data to identify suspicious behaviours.
We do know people do get picked upon although I've never met anybody who has or who knows anyone who has. And we know some of them get done although the figures IPSE last produced showed the chances of getting off are almost 100% as long as you go into battle fully tooled up.
However I've said this a number of times on here (ie 'what proof have you got for your barrack room prognostications?') and nobody wants to know.
You might as well give up now.
If you're a squarely inside IR35 (it is what it is; borderline at best) BAU monkey like PC, then you need to work out whether it is worth the risk that in the very unlikely event that you are investigated, you are significantly more likely to lose.Comment
-
Originally posted by Cirrus View PostTotally agree with you, Brummie.
99% of all contractors are de facto IR35.
The game you play is judging whether you will be extremely unlucky and get investigated. And then be extremely, extremely unlucky for QDOS not to get you off.
To me it's entirely a question of risk appetite.
A typical dialogue is
OP " If I take a contract where , what should I do?"
NLUK " You will be deemed to be "
Of course the truth is you can do what you like. Nothing happens until your return goes in. Then some process (nobody knows the details) picks out a tiny amount of cases to probe. I worked at HMRC for a while and my sense was they have extremely limited capabilities and freedom to search data to identify suspicious behaviours.
We do know people do get picked upon although I've never met anybody who has or who knows anyone who has. And we know some of them get done although the figures IPSE last produced showed the chances of getting off are almost 100% as long as you go into battle fully tooled up.
However I've said this a number of times on here (ie 'what proof have you got for your barrack room prognostications?') and nobody wants to know.
You might as well give up now.
Hang around professional long enough and you'll see a vast majority of threads are about the OP not knowing enough about IR35 so totally disagree about people knowing about IR35 and coming on for an opinion. Secondly NATs selective tulip modding failed to being the context over where blossom got a number of factors about IR35 wrong which is why we got in to it in the first place so the evidence is right there in that very thread.
You are right, we don't know so all the more reason to know the finer points to help make your decision about amount of risk hence the discussion.'CUK forum personality of 2011 - Winner - Yes really!!!!Comment
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Streamline Your Retirement with iSIPP: A Solution for Contractor Pensions Sep 1 09:13
- Making the most of pension lump sums: overview for contractors Sep 1 08:36
- Umbrella company tribunal cases are opening up; are your wages subject to unlawful deductions, too? Aug 31 08:38
- Contractors, relabelling 'labour' as 'services' to appear 'fully contracted out' won't dupe IR35 inspectors Aug 31 08:30
- How often does HMRC check tax returns? Aug 30 08:27
- Work-life balance as an IT contractor: 5 top tips from a tech recruiter Aug 30 08:20
- Autumn Statement 2023 tipped to prioritise mental health, in a boost for UK workplaces Aug 29 08:33
- Final reminder for contractors to respond to the umbrella consultation (closing today) Aug 29 08:09
- Top 5 most in demand cyber security contract roles Aug 25 08:38
- Changes to the right to request flexible working are incoming, but how will contractors be affected? Aug 24 08:25
Comment