Is it as bad as it seems? Is it as bad as it seems? - Page 3
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Posts 21 to 30 of 41
  1. #21

    Should post faster


    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Posts
    195

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by eek View Post
    For most clients there isn't - why take the risk of HMRC investigating your decisions and presenting you with a large bill when you can just insist on an inside IR35 contract.

    And I'm sure that's exactly what HMRC are saying on the QT. To ensure these changes work we will need to pick some companies as test cases - are you feeling lucky punk?
    I think they've been rather clever in picking their "test cases" from the public sector, just before the private sector changes go live, "pour encourageur les autres." The public sector won't push back too hard as it's really robbing Peter to pay Paul and it makes a show of teeth at just the right time.

    However some private sector clients won't be too afraid. It's pretty clear what makes a contractor outside IR35 if a client really wants to do it. As has been said by myself and others they most likely won't bother for very common resource skillsets, but if 20-odd BigCos are all chasing a small pool of niche guys and gals, it won't be long until one looks for first-mover advantage.

  2. #22

    Super poster


    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Midlands
    Posts
    2,757

    Default

    Yep. Business travel has been a staple of my life for nearly a decade now since becoming a permie consultant back around 2010. Now I feel like I'm pretty much ****ed, unless I go back permie.

    We'll see, I guess. I just hope I get a Tory canvasser or MP at my door to chat to.

  3. #23

    Still gathering requirements...


    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    48

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paralytic View Post
    The client will chose from those that do apply and will be blissfully unaware that there are other people who excluded themselves
    Taking this to its logical next step, clients will find themselves unable to resource important roles with suitably capable resident workers and will lobby Government to relax visa restrictions. And, unlike the dodgy claims made by bodyshoppers today, clients and outsource consultancies alike will be able to provide genuine evidence of a lack of applications and hence a need to import skills. So things could get far, far worse for resident workers.

  4. #24

    More time posting than coding


    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    430

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Snooky View Post
    Taking this to its logical next step, clients will find themselves unable to resource important roles with suitably capable resident workers and will lobby Government to relax visa restrictions. And, unlike the dodgy claims made by bodyshoppers today, clients and outsource consultancies alike will be able to provide genuine evidence of a lack of applications and hence a need to import skills. So things could get far, far worse for resident workers.
    Potentially, yes, but I suspect 85% (+/- 10%) of roles that are filled on-shore today will continue to be filled by someone locally. The perhaps won't get the best candidate compared to what they might have gotten previously, but they take what they can get. For the rest, the market will dictate how suitable candidates will make themselves available, either through the clients agreeing to offering outside IR35 roles, or increasing the inside IR35 rate.
    Last edited by Paralytic; 18th November 2019 at 14:57.

  5. #25

    Godlike

    BolshieBastard's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    kicking tulip out of a borg cube
    Posts
    5,639

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simes View Post
    I wonder if, once clients see the reason they're not getting contractors to come visit them, they may not offer per diems, or hotel rooms costed and invoiced straight to the client.

    (Caveats: I don't know, am only wondering, no experience of anything in 2020 (at time of writing), Brave New World etc.)
    Cough, WIPRO, cough, TATA, cough.
    I couldn't give two fornicators! Yes, really!

  6. #26

    Should post faster


    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    110

    Default

    Part of me thinks there is little need to worry if you're a premium rate contractor.

    Clients don't want expensive contracts with WiPro, Tata, Cognizant, with complex lock-in terms and get out clauses.

    If they want a contractor or two with SoW to complete projects then they'll offer a higher inside IR35 rate and perhaps even expenses or a good outside IR35 rate to attract the best talent.

    Once the dust settles and agencies stop promising pretend managed services contracts then the default lawyer template letters to HMRC from end clients can ensure the end contractor is outside IR35.

  7. #27

    Contractor Among Contractors

    Cirrus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Rural Rutland
    Posts
    1,064

    Default As if by magic?

    Quote Originally Posted by rogerfederer View Post
    the default lawyer template letters to HMRC from end clients can ensure the end contractor is outside IR35.
    There is a strong theme here that clients only need to sort themselves out and the problem is magically solved.

    In my experience, 99% of contractors are bums-on-seats. What they do couldn't be written down to look any more defined than the job descriptions given to permies. Most contractors will fill roles which involve fitting in with other people's work on a changing and developing basis, controlled necessarily by the organisation concerned, in terms of what should be done, how it should be done and in precisely what timescales, which in turn change frequently and unpredictably.

    Contractors got away with ignoring IR35 because the Revenue could never prove anything in 'court' but the tide has turned. Statements-of-work don't change anything. Clients may not want the risk of being landed with big 'fines' or, alternatively, having to pay for contractors who are now massively less useful because they have to be treated like a bunch of one-man Accentures.

    Offshorers are going to eat everyone's lunch - flexible resources, do as they're told, and cheap.
    "Don't part with your illusions; when they are gone you may still exist, but you have ceased to live" Mark Twain

  8. #28

    bored now

    eek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    😂
    Posts
    22,917

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cirrus View Post
    There is a strong theme here that clients only need to sort themselves out and the problem is magically solved.

    In my experience, 99% of contractors are bums-on-seats. What they do couldn't be written down to look any more defined than the job descriptions given to permies. Most contractors will fill roles which involve fitting in with other people's work on a changing and developing basis, controlled necessarily by the organisation concerned, in terms of what should be done, how it should be done and in precisely what timescales, which in turn change frequently and unpredictably.

    Contractors got away with ignoring IR35 because the Revenue could never prove anything in 'court' but the tide has turned. Statements-of-work don't change anything. Clients may not want the risk of being landed with big 'fines' or, alternatively, having to pay for contractors who are now massively less useful because they have to be treated like a bunch of one-man Accentures.

    Offshorers are going to eat everyone's lunch - flexible resources, do as they're told, and cheap.
    +1 to all of that.

    The era when companies used contractors to replace / supplement permanent employees has gone with these changes. The greatest fear of most companies is that HMRC will find one badly managed contractor who now looks like an employee and HMRC ask for the 500 other contractors to be included in the case.

    Equally once a company gets to the point of writing statements of work you may as well give someone the entire project and offshore it - I know that's what I would do. Why manage it yourself when you can throw the entire project elsewhere on a payment on delivery model.
    merely at clientco for the entertainment

  9. #29

    More time posting than coding

    Manic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    346

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cirrus View Post
    There is a strong theme here that clients only need to sort themselves out and the problem is magically solved.

    In my experience, 99% of contractors are bums-on-seats. What they do couldn't be written down to look any more defined than the job descriptions given to permies. Most contractors will fill roles which involve fitting in with other people's work on a changing and developing basis, controlled necessarily by the organisation concerned, in terms of what should be done, how it should be done and in precisely what timescales, which in turn change frequently and unpredictably.

    Contractors got away with ignoring IR35 because the Revenue could never prove anything in 'court' but the tide has turned. Statements-of-work don't change anything. Clients may not want the risk of being landed with big 'fines' or, alternatively, having to pay for contractors who are now massively less useful because they have to be treated like a bunch of one-man Accentures.

    Offshorers are going to eat everyone's lunch - flexible resources, do as they're told, and cheap.
    Quote Originally Posted by eek View Post
    +1 to all of that.

    The era when companies used contractors to replace / supplement permanent employees has gone with these changes. The greatest fear of most companies is that HMRC will find one badly managed contractor who now looks like an employee and HMRC ask for the 500 other contractors to be included in the case.

    Equally once a company gets to the point of writing statements of work you may as well give someone the entire project and offshore it - I know that's what I would do. Why manage it yourself when you can throw the entire project elsewhere on a payment on delivery model.
    Yup agreed. It doesn't matter how much case law is presented from the contractor side, the client will look to reduce risk. At the end of the day the premium for reducing risk is a big fat zero as the rate will just absorb it. Yes some rates might rise, but the market will now be reset.

    The HMRC view, and the view they will be giving clients is that 90% of contractors are caught. No arguments.

    I think if most contractors were being honest they would agree that subby is a sham and there is always an element of control, be it working patttern, hours, procedures to follow etc. Thinking that clients will write SoWs with deliverables at a fixed price is pie in the sky.

  10. #30

    Contractor Among Contractors


    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    1,386

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cirrus View Post
    There is a strong theme here that clients only need to sort themselves out and the problem is magically solved.

    In my experience, 99% of contractors are bums-on-seats. What they do couldn't be written down to look any more defined than the job descriptions given to permies. Most contractors will fill roles which involve fitting in with other people's work on a changing and developing basis, controlled necessarily by the organisation concerned, in terms of what should be done, how it should be done and in precisely what timescales, which in turn change frequently and unpredictably.

    Contractors got away with ignoring IR35 because the Revenue could never prove anything in 'court' but the tide has turned. Statements-of-work don't change anything. Clients may not want the risk of being landed with big 'fines' or, alternatively, having to pay for contractors who are now massively less useful because they have to be treated like a bunch of one-man Accentures.

    Offshorers are going to eat everyone's lunch - flexible resources, do as they're told, and cheap.
    In my experience, 99% of contractors are bums-on-seats.
    I would agree. In my 23 years of contracting, I've never worked with anyone who some representative organisations would claim were IBOYOA. i.e., contracted directly, had multiple clients, had a web sire, had business cards etc etc. This has been part of the problem. Those running those representative organisations felt that they could counter IR35 by pushing the IBOYOA ideology, whilst ignoring that very few contractors worked this way.

Posting Permissions

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