Small Business Exemption Small Business Exemption
Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Posts 1 to 10 of 32
  1. #1

    Fingers like lightning

    BlueSharp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    553

    Default Small Business Exemption

    Morning,

    If you contract direct with a business that meets the small business exemption. Does IR35 liability 'fall back' to the current position that it's the PSC responsibility to assess and take the IR35 liability or does the exemption mean that IR35 does not apply at all.

  2. #2

    Super poster


    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    WTT Consulting Ltd - London and online
    Posts
    3,061

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueSharp View Post
    Morning,

    If you contract direct with a business that meets the small business exemption. Does IR35 liability 'fall back' to the current position that it's the PSC responsibility to assess and take the IR35 liability or does the exemption mean that IR35 does not apply at all.
    Where the end client is "small" then the contractor has to decide their own IR35 status and take their own risk on that decision.

    Just be aware that having or not having a PSC makes very little difference to that decision.
    Best Forum Adviser & Forum Personality of the Year 2018.

    (No, me neither).

  3. #3

    More time posting than coding


    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    267

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by webberg View Post
    Just be aware that having or not having a PSC makes very little difference to that decision.
    IR35 can only apply where the contractor is working via a limited company, surely?

  4. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueSharp View Post
    Morning,

    If you contract direct with a business that meets the small business exemption. Does IR35 liability 'fall back' to the current position that it's the PSC responsibility to assess and take the IR35 liability
    Yes, same as now, liability as now.

    That exemption won't last more than a couple of tax years, at most, I predict.

  5. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fidot View Post
    IR35 can only apply where the contractor is working via a limited company, surely?
    Sure (or partnership), but I think webberg means that the intermediary is "looked through" in a status decision. Hence the "intermediaries" legislation.

  6. #6

    Super poster


    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    WTT Consulting Ltd - London and online
    Posts
    3,061

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesbrown View Post
    Sure (or partnership), but I think webberg means that the intermediary is "looked through" in a status decision. Hence the "intermediaries" legislation.
    Correct, the legislation deals with intermediaries.

    In the vast majority of instances this is a PSC (because these interposed a legal entity between individual and client co) and both parties preferred that/believed the myth about the protection it offered.

    Partnerships are less common for a number of reasons.

    You can of course be self employed and contract direct with client co. No intermediary and whilst there are still rules around whether that makes you an employee or not, IR35 is not in point.
    Best Forum Adviser & Forum Personality of the Year 2018.

    (No, me neither).

  7. #7

    Fingers like lightning


    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    807

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by webberg View Post
    Correct, the legislation deals with intermediaries.

    In the vast majority of instances this is a PSC (because these interposed a legal entity between individual and client co) and both parties preferred that/believed the myth about the protection it offered.

    Partnerships are less common for a number of reasons.

    You can of course be self employed and contract direct with client co. No intermediary and whilst there are still rules around whether that makes you an employee or not, IR35 is not in point.
    We know that the contractor - their Co. - agency - client was a structure set up to protect the clients and to a certain extent also protects the contractor as the IR35 liability was on their Co. and not them selves, as far as I understand the issues.

    But could we now possibly see more situations where the contractor deals directly with the clients and not through their Co? Under the new regime, would this structure present less problems to the clients? I know there is the argument about director incompetence or illegal activity, but if their company is challenged and there are no funds to pay an IR35 bill, then their company becomes insolvent and so the individual isn't required to pay. Or do I understand this incorrectly? If the contract were to be direct to the client, then the individual wouldn't be subject to the IR35 taxes, but any shortfall for any other reason would mean that the individual would be liable.

    I guess it's a grey area, but do we have examples of cases around these issues?

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JohntheBike View Post
    We know that the contractor - their Co. - agency - client was a structure set up to protect the clients and to a certain extent also protects the contractor as the IR35 liability was on their Co. and not them selves, as far as I understand the issues.

    But could we now possibly see more situations where the contractor deals directly with the clients and not through their Co? Under the new regime, would this structure present less problems to the clients? I know there is the argument about director incompetence or illegal activity, but if their company is challenged and there are no funds to pay an IR35 bill, then their company becomes insolvent and so the individual isn't required to pay. Or do I understand this incorrectly? If the contract were to be direct to the client, then the individual wouldn't be subject to the IR35 taxes, but any shortfall for any other reason would mean that the individual would be liable.

    I guess it's a grey area, but do we have examples of cases around these issues?
    Yes, you understand incorrectly.

    For small companies post April 2020:

    • Liability sits with the fee payer first. Fee payer could be an agency or the client.
    • If fee payer cannot pay, and there is an entity in the chain immediately below the client, liability moves there.
    • Failing all else, liability moves to the client.
    • Liability never moves to the intermediary (EDIT: actually, there are some provisions on providing fraudulent information, but these are in extremis).

    There's a helpful diagram somewhere in the Finance Bill 2020 collection.

    Bottom line, the only risk to an intermediary and its workers, post April 2020, is a contractual one between the fee payer and the intermediary (which mostly won't work, I predict). So, if you're working outside post April 2020, there is less risk, in principle.

    Organisations like IPSE and other insurance-based outfits that focus on contractors will need to pivot in this new world.

    HTH.
    Last edited by jamesbrown; 16th July 2019 at 08:57.

  9. #9

    Fingers like lightning


    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    807

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesbrown View Post
    Yes, you understand incorrectly.

    For small companies post April 2020:

    • Liability sits with the fee payer first. Fee payer could be an agency or the client.
    • If fee payer cannot pay, and there is an entity in the chain immediately below the client, liability moves there.
    • Failing all else, liability moves to the client.
    • Liability never moves to the intermediary (EDIT: actually, there are some provisions on providing fraudulent information, but these are in extremis).

    There's a helpful diagram somewhere in the Finance Bill 2020 collection.

    Bottom line, the only risk to an intermediary and its workers, post April 2020, is a contractual one between the fee payer and the intermediary (which mostly won't work, I predict). So, if you're working outside post April 2020, there is less risk, in principle.

    Organisations like IPSE and other insurance-based outfits that focus on contractors will need to pivot in this new world.

    HTH.
    please explain what I understand incorrectly.

    Logic would tend to suggest that there is less risk to the client and the contractor if the contractor genuinely works outside of IR35 from April 2020. But logic doesn't work in the IR35 arena.

    IPSE is likely to become a lost cause when these regulations begin to bite.

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JohntheBike View Post
    please explain what I understand incorrectly.

    Logic would tend to suggest that there is less risk to the client and the contractor if the contractor genuinely works outside of IR35 from April 2020. But logic doesn't work in the IR35 arena.

    IPSE is likely to become a lost cause when these regulations begin to bite.
    How can there be less risk for the client when the risk has moved emphatically from the contractor’s intermediary pre-April 2020 to the client as a backstop post? Some risk is more than zero risk.

    IPSE has been furiously peddling away from PCG for some time. Many contractors will be furiously peddling away from IPSE in the coming years.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •