New CEST New CEST
Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Posts 1 to 10 of 35

Thread: New CEST

  1. #1

    Still gathering requirements...


    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    98

    Default New CEST

    So this is what has been causing millions in backdated liabilities for public sector bodies - the new CEST plus guidance is out.

    Check employment status for tax - GOV.UK

    Thoughts?

  2. #2

    More time posting than coding

    Manic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    371

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ComplianceLady View Post
    So this is what has been causing millions in backdated liabilities for public sector bodies - the new CEST plus guidance is out.

    Check employment status for tax - GOV.UK

    Thoughts?

    All about the substitute. I scored outside but changed my answer to client could reject substitute and now inside.

  3. #3

    Super poster

    ladymuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    London
    Posts
    4,847

    Default

    Just ran my gig through it and, even though clientco would have veto over a sub, I was deemed outside. Here's hoping they come to the same conclusion when doing their determination.

  4. #4

    Super poster


    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    2,533

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Manic View Post
    All about the substitute. I scored outside but changed my answer to client could reject substitute and now inside.
    Yes, just for kicks, I answered that I hadn't substituted but I could, and the client had no right to refuse. Then I went through all the other questions, every single one, and answered them as poorly as I could for IR35. It still showed outside, so an unfettered right to sub is still a silver bullet.

    Then, I answered that the client could reject substitution, and then I answered EVERY SINGLE QUESTION the right way on Supervision, Direction, Control. Except for one -- I answered that I could be moved to a new task only if I agreed, rather than saying it would need a new contract. And it came back as unable to make a determination. That's right, if you decide how, when, and where to do the work, if you can't be moved to a new task without your approval, then it can't tell you that you are outside.

    Of course, in the real world, real businesses agree to do extra stuff all the time as part of their working relationship with their customers. It doesn't require a new contract, they just agree. "Oh, can you also replace my windscreen wiper?" "Sure, that will cost £X." "Cool." No, not cool, HMRC would say that means you might be controlled and an employee of the car owner, so they can't be certain you are outside.

    Stupid.

  5. #5

    Fingers like lightning


    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    712

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WordIsBond View Post
    Yes, just for kicks, I answered that I hadn't substituted but I could, and the client had no right to refuse. Then I went through all the other questions, every single one, and answered them as poorly as I could for IR35. It still showed outside, so an unfettered right to sub is still a silver bullet.

    Then, I answered that the client could reject substitution, and then I answered EVERY SINGLE QUESTION the right way on Supervision, Direction, Control. Except for one -- I answered that I could be moved to a new task only if I agreed, rather than saying it would need a new contract. And it came back as unable to make a determination. That's right, if you decide how, when, and where to do the work, if you can't be moved to a new task without your approval, then it can't tell you that you are outside.

    Of course, in the real world, real businesses agree to do extra stuff all the time as part of their working relationship with their customers. It doesn't require a new contract, they just agree. "Oh, can you also replace my windscreen wiper?" "Sure, that will cost £X." "Cool." No, not cool, HMRC would say that means you might be controlled and an employee of the car owner, so they can't be certain you are outside.

    Stupid.
    ha ha ha. Funny scenario. Cheers.

  6. #6

    Contractor Among Contractors


    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    1,601

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WordIsBond View Post
    Yes, just for kicks, I answered that I hadn't substituted but I could, and the client had no right to refuse. Then I went through all the other questions, every single one, and answered them as poorly as I could for IR35. It still showed outside, so an unfettered right to sub is still a silver bullet.

    Then, I answered that the client could reject substitution, and then I answered EVERY SINGLE QUESTION the right way on Supervision, Direction, Control. Except for one -- I answered that I could be moved to a new task only if I agreed, rather than saying it would need a new contract. And it came back as unable to make a determination. That's right, if you decide how, when, and where to do the work, if you can't be moved to a new task without your approval, then it can't tell you that you are outside.

    Of course, in the real world, real businesses agree to do extra stuff all the time as part of their working relationship with their customers. It doesn't require a new contract, they just agree. "Oh, can you also replace my windscreen wiper?" "Sure, that will cost £X." "Cool." No, not cool, HMRC would say that means you might be controlled and an employee of the car owner, so they can't be certain you are outside.

    Stupid.
    Of course, in the real world, real businesses agree to do extra stuff all the time as part of their working relationship with their customers.
    I can't remember the technical term but in layman's terms it's variation of the contract by mutual agreement.

  7. #7

    Still gathering requirements...


    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    98

    Default

    Yes I've put a few scenarios through (which are all tested via QDOS, LH and others) and they seem to hang on substitution where it is in any way grey, the weighting is way out IMO. The guidance is good I think in the ESM, it explains the thinking - even where it's flawed but realistically no client is going to indulge in reading it. Some of the new questions I don't think can be answered pre-contract.

    I've seen a definite shift the last couple of months in clients moving away from CEST. When we started canvassing a lot said they were planning to use it but we've not got 1 client at the moment committed to using it. Whilst I'm not convinced business is prepared by any stretch, this is at least a positive outcome from the awareness raising being done by many.

  8. #8

    Godlike

    ChimpMaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Here There and Everywhere
    Posts
    5,617

    Default

    I tried this out with a few scenarios.

    The Sub one is obviously outside IR35.

    Then I chose No Sub + Client can reject Sub. I went through the rest of the questions in a solid out-of-IR35 way (i.e. "No, that would require a new contract or formal working arrangement" and "No, you solely decide") and CEST actually gave me an outside determination. I was surprised.

    But then I changed one little thing on this question:
    Does your client have the right to move you from the task you originally agreed to do?
    I changed the answer from No, that would require a new contract or formal working arrangement to No, you would have to agree … and suddenly I am determined INSIDE IR35!

    Looks like the determination will hinge on the slightest thing, unless you have a silver bullet Sub.

  9. #9

    Super poster

    ladymuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    London
    Posts
    4,847

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ChimpMaster View Post
    I tried this out with a few scenarios.

    The Sub one is obviously outside IR35.

    Then I chose No Sub + Client can reject Sub. I went through the rest of the questions in a solid out-of-IR35 way (i.e. "No, that would require a new contract or formal working arrangement" and "No, you solely decide") and CEST actually gave me an outside determination. I was surprised.

    But then I changed one little thing on this question:
    Does your client have the right to move you from the task you originally agreed to do?
    I changed the answer from No, that would require a new contract or formal working arrangement to No, you would have to agree … and suddenly I am determined INSIDE IR35!

    Looks like the determination will hinge on the slightest thing, unless you have a silver bullet Sub.
    How odd, I chose the end Client can reject the sub AND I would have to agree to any additional work (not the new SOW type option) and I got an outside determination. There must be something else you selected to bring you inside.

  10. #10

    TPAFKAk2p2

    mudskipper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Null island
    Posts
    26,101

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ladymuck View Post
    How odd, I chose the end Client can reject the sub AND I would have to agree to any additional work (not the new SOW type option) and I got an outside determination. There must be something else you selected to bring you inside.
    I got an inside on repeat contracts which are clearly outside. Fortunately for me, my client is "small" so it's not an issue. My clientB which is equivalent to servicing the photcopier got an undecided.

Posting Permissions

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