Why big corp and hmrc have a dislike for contractors?

[GigiBronz]

When HMRC band numbers about I believe they include a made-up include number that groups together perimies who would go contracting but remain permie. So the clamp down is to also reverse the trend of of people leaving to go contracting. Now the tories are in full power they will be clamping down on permie rights so the tax without representation will become the next I'm for all.

So what I understand:
- they might have a plug-in number to estimate how much they gain if people don't jump ships. Replacing resources comes with finders fee, training time, cost of assessing the new resource(time of a panel of managers) and additional risk the new person might not be up to par.
If the person leaving is an essential resource to the team then cost is a lot higher (for comp not hmrc).
So understandable they don't like the cost.
Question is, when they actually have to get resources, will they be able to motivate that person to take the role?

- "tax without representation" pay everything as a permanent resource, you don't get compensated for additional risk you take.
As a permanent you can still get fired in first 2y without much fuss, redundancy package before 3-4y is not significant anyway. So security is a red herring anyway.
Pretty much what my thoughts were before, they are changing the resourcing model to limit opportunities and create more manageable approach.
If IR35 has been a compromise solution in the past(for them) to get resources, now looking forward what are they counting on to give more fluidity?
Questioning if EU Tier 1 visa requirements were an impediment and now they can count consultancies and external resource to fill the gaps.

[Peoplesoft bloke]

I suspect the whole thing is just due to the merry-go-round of senior civil servants and consultancy firms.

They swap "good ideas" - in this case a great way to ensure the tax system is as complex as possible so it needs more people to administer it.

MPs have a cheek too - their gig is expected to last more than 2 years in one place but all their expenses are tax free.

[JohntheBike]

I suspect the whole thing is just due to the merry-go-round of senior civil servants and consultancy firms.

They swap "good ideas" - in this case a great way to ensure the tax system is as complex as possible so it needs more people to administer it.

MPs have a cheek too - their gig is expected to last more than 2 years in one place but all their expenses are tax free.

MPs have a cheek too - their gig is expected to last more than 2 years in one place but all their expenses are tax free.

interesting point of view! I'll put it to my MP. So is it fair that MP's who have a place of work which is likely to be more than 2 years can claim tax free expenses? Well, no, but that's how corrupt the system is.

[Peoplesoft bloke]

MP Costs