Agency quarterly submission content

[realaledrinker]

There's been lots of speculation as to how easily HMRC would track someone moving from outside to inside, to brolly or FTC.


I asked my agency what information was sent and whether the end client was identified. Here's the response, make of it what you will:

The quarterly report we submit to HMRC only references the contractor and their PSC/LTD Company or the Umbrella company they are paid through. There is no information regarding clients, an example of the information we submit is below;

Contractor:
Name
DOB
Address
NI number
Start and end date (end date if placement has finished)
Amount paid and if they are VAT registered

PSC Information:
Registered name
Address
Reg number

[wattaj]

There's been lots of speculation as to how easily HMRC would track someone moving from outside to inside, to brolly or FTC.


I asked my agency what information was sent and whether the end client was identified. Here's the response, make of it what you will:

The quarterly report we submit to HMRC only references the contractor and their PSC/LTD Company or the Umbrella company they are paid through. There is no information regarding clients, an example of the information we submit is below;

Contractor:
Name
DOB
Address
NI number
Start and end date (end date if placement has finished)
Amount paid and if they are VAT registered

PSC Information:
Registered name
Address
Reg number

This has been the case for a number of years now. I'm quite surprised that you're surprised TBH.

[PSChick]

so anybody know how they ID'd the GSK contractors, past and present, to target them with threatening letters? If it's not on the agency return, I can't see how they are joining up the dots and figuring out who is where!

[northernladuk]

so anybody know how they ID'd the GSK contractors, past and present, to target them with threatening letters? If it's not on the agency return, I can't see how they are joining up the dots and figuring out who is where!

I think something is missing from what he's been told.

Have a look at this..

What this means for an intermediary - GOV.UK

About a quarter of the way down.

You must provide details about workers and their engagements. This includes engagements they are working on and those that ended in the reporting period you’re sending a report for.

[realaledrinker]

There's been lots of speculation as to how easily HMRC would track someone moving from outside to inside, to brolly or FTC.

My point is they would not be able to track someone moving from working for an end client via a PSC to a FTC direct with that same client, at least not solely based on the agency return.

[DolanContractorGroup]

I think something is missing from what he's been told.

Have a look at this..

What this means for an intermediary - GOV.UK

About a quarter of the way down.

Hi NLUK,

I don't think this implies that the end client details need to be added.

From experience, only the contractor details have ever been included in the report. The template can be found here: Employment intermediaries: report template - GOV.UK


Kind regards

Zeeshan

[Scoooby]

Hi NLUK,

I don't think this implies that the end client details need to be added.

From experience, only the contractor details have ever been included in the report. The template can be found here: Employment intermediaries: report template - GOV.UK


Kind regards

Zeeshan

I think you are right when you look at the template requirements in detail.

I think this gives some hope for potential ways of reducing the risk of an HMRC investigation.

For example by working via a different agency for the same client if going from outside to inside after April.

This might require agreement with the agency to allow you to do this (unlikely) or if you leave a gap big enough to go beyond the restriction clause in the contract (for example 3 months in my situation).

Conversely, if you use the same agency, especially with no or little gap between contracts, then this would definitely look like you are working with the same client to HMRC.

[NeedTheSunshine]

I think you are right when you look at the template requirements in detail.

I think this gives some hope for potential ways of reducing the risk of an HMRC investigation.

For example by working via a different agency for the same client if going from outside to inside after April.

This might require agreement with the agency to allow you to do this (unlikely) or if you leave a gap big enough to go beyond the restriction clause in the contract (for example 3 months in my situation).

Conversely, if you use the same agency, especially with no or little gap between contracts, then this would definitely look like you are working with the same client to HMRC.

I think you're being overly optimistic about that solution.

[eek]

I think you're being overly optimistic about that solution.

A network of agencies with a senior manager who posts on here did exactly that.

Whether it worked or not I don't know but the logic was that agency 1 did not do that type of contract and agency 2 did and it did mean you would not appear on the most obvious report.

[Scoooby]

From everything I've read about the risks of being flagged on HMRC's radar post April (not talking about the consequences of an investigation but just the likelihood of HMRC taking an interest).

I fail to understand how in practical terms your risk is increased if you decided to work with the same client going outside to inside but using a different agency after say a 3 months gap of no work. Assuming the gap started before the next tax year (no later than start of April).

Compared with the same scenario except working with a different client (also using a different agency).

The same information should be submitted via the Intermediaries Report assuming all else is equal apart from the end client (which is not included in this return). Therefore the risk of HMRC taking an initial interest should surely be the same?


Conversely, if you used the same agency but worked with a different client (again assuming everything else the same as above), then surely this would be more risky in terms of attracting HMRC's attention? As they would probably assume you are still working with the same client (as the same agency is involved).

I'd be interested to know if there are any other contractors considering doing something similar to reduce the risk of an investigation.