• 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!

IR35 reforms prompt Barclays to re-engage contractors on PAYE terms

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #11
    Originally posted by BlueSharp View Post
    They do this with the JLR factory workers down the road. Permiedom will be seen as the premium option v's the marginal increase in take home pay a worker will get.

    JTB - we know.
    JTB - we know
    yes, I said it was the wrong option to substantially increase the workforce in JLR when there was an upturn because when the inevitable downturn occurred, as now, those workforce additions would be made redundant.. It would have been better to take advantage of the increased demand by making the company more efficient.

    Comment


      #12
      I can see why Barclays have done this. They are avoiding making the inside/outside determination full stop. If they did a blanket everybody inside then surely at some point contractors would test the determination in court arguing that the bank wrongly classified them and the wrong tax was paid as a result. To bring people in on PAYE means that they are not making any decision regarding IR35 because they are employing the person and removing the PSC from the equation

      If this becomes the norm, it's going to be a nightmare simply having HMRC charging the correct amount of tax based on numerous contracts per year at different rates and possibly overlapping or with periods out of work. A doddle to do with a limited company. Not so easy to do with our cumbersome tax code.
      Rule Number 1 - Assuming that you have a valid contract in place always try to get your poo onto your timesheet, provided that the timesheet is valid for your current contract and covers the period of time that you are billing for.

      I preferred version 1!

      Comment


        #13
        Originally posted by BoredBloke View Post
        To bring people in on PAYE means that they are not making any decision regarding IR35 because they are employing the person and removing the PSC from the equation.
        Barclays have not said they will "bring people in on PAYE". They're pushing people to PAYE on umbrellas/managed service companies. Of course, specific projects/areas within the bank may open up positions and bring individuals in on perm, but that's not part of this internal announcement.

        Originally posted by BoredBloke View Post
        If this becomes the norm, it's going to be a nightmare simply having HMRC charging the correct amount of tax based on numerous contracts per year at different rates and possibly overlapping or with periods out of work. A doddle to do with a limited company. Not so easy to do with our cumbersome tax code.
        Not sure what you mean by this. Contractors who no longer contract for Barclays via their PSC but agree to go PAYE via another means (umbrella, managed service) will have their taxes taken at source. And if you happen to have two such engagements running at the same time, then you'll have two employments, potentially pay "too much" tax at source but then settle up as part of your self assessment.
        Last edited by Paralytic; 2 October 2019, 14:19.

        Comment


          #14
          The banks are risk averse and this move is no surprise.

          They do not want employees on their books but they do not want a big unexpected bill. Therefore they will always go for an "inside IR35" determination and leave the agency/contractor to sort out an umbrella.

          The agency is encouraging this as they have an umbrella and this allows them to continue to control the "flexible" workforce.

          Umbrella rates will increase as they become the dominant force and the cycle repeats.

          An umbrella is an umbrella - they are (or should be) all the same, save a few frilly edges.

          There is no reason to use the agency umbrella and you should be looking around for the best suited to you option, both immediately and in the future.
          Best Forum Adviser & Forum Personality of the Year 2018.

          (No, me neither).

          Comment


            #15
            Originally posted by webberg View Post
            The banks are risk averse and this move is no surprise.

            They do not want employees on their books but they do not want a big unexpected bill. Therefore they will always go for an "inside IR35" determination and leave the agency/contractor to sort out an umbrella.
            I think its important to point out that they're not always going for an inside IR35 determination - some are applying a policy of "no contracts" and therefore no determination is required. Its a distinction with specific (positive) implications.

            I agree with the rest of your post on how things will pan out, though i do think we'll start to see a trickle of "outside IR35" contracts appearing from banks 6-12 months after the new rules come in.
            Last edited by Paralytic; 8 October 2019, 09:05.

            Comment


              #16
              Originally posted by Paralytic View Post
              I think its important to point out that they're not always going for an inside IR35 determination - some are applying a policy of "no contracts" and therefore no determination is required. Its a distinction with specific (positive) implications.

              I agree with the rest of your post on how things will pan out, though i do think we'll start to see a trickle of "outside IR35" contracts appearing from banks 6-12 months after the new rules come in.
              I agree with this.

              They are going for the hassle free route - they are not providing a determination at all (and therefore do not need to implement the appeals process) - they are "simply" changing policy so that they no longer hire limited company contractors. It's exactly what I'd do if I was in charge of compliance at a large company. It's also exactly what many predicted would happen - and belies the claim that the genuinely self employed will not be affected by these reforms. It also discriminates against the smallest companies who can no longer bid for work at the bank. It's a mess.

              Comment


                #17
                Originally posted by mudskipper View Post
                ...It's also exactly what many predicted would happen...
                * waves *
                ---

                Former member of IPSE.


                ---
                Many a mickle makes a muckle.

                ---

                Comment

                Working...
                X