1 month extension for March 2020 is it worth it. 1 month extension for March 2020 is it worth it. - Page 2
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Posts 11 to 19 of 19
  1. #11

    My post count is Majestic

    northernladuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    44,595

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CompoundOverload View Post
    What about those clients (large and small) that have both contractors inside (umbrella, FTCs et al and outside) - would they still be seen as a target given they have a hybrid of both on their books?

    My current client would be regarded a a medium sized house but doesn't have many contractors - not sure how they would be viewed as on your risk barometer?
    I'm not sure HMRC have enough data to make that call but IMO a client with a mix is showing some diligence and could be argued is assessing and actioning by role. If be more worried if a client has everyone inside or everyone outside. Neither of those is what HMRC expects or makes sense.. If you see what I mean.
    'CUK forum personality of 2011 - Winner - Yes really!!!!

  2. #12

    Super poster


    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    2,940

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CompoundOverload View Post
    What about those clients (large and small) that have both contractors inside (umbrella, FTCs et al and outside) - would they still be seen as a target given they have a hybrid of both on their books?
    If HMRC were run on sane principles, they would say, 'This would be a tough target because they are obviously thinking through these decisions.' But when we look at the IR35 cases that have gone to Tribunal and lost, we see that these decisions are not being made based on sanity.

    They have chosen high-profile cases because if they get wins on high-profile cases, they get publicity, with the resulting deterrent effect. I do not think they are so stupid as to want to lose cases, they are taking high risk (for them) cases simply because they want the publicity to scare people into going inside.

    That would suggest that if a client has any substantive number of outside contractors, even if they have a hybrid, they may be a target. A client with 30 inside and 10 outside contractors is still a lot more lucrative, if they win the case, than a single contractor, even if he has 3-4 years of history, and the individual historical case has little deterrent effect any longer.

    The agenda is simply not justice. It just isn't. It's to get as many people on payroll as possible because it means more money (allegedly, though probably not in reality) and because it is easier to enforce and to claim they've closed the tax gap.

    So the responsible client may not be the first target they'll go after but I suspect they will be targeted more aggressively than historical individual cases. Those historical individual cases are going to be having diminishing returns because so many PSCs are going to be closing down rapidly.

  3. #13

    Should post faster


    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    135

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WordIsBond View Post
    And, question 2. If the client weren't going to give an SDS, why would you not extend, however long you've been there? Not sure I understand the question.

    The risk of staying comes from the negative impact of an inside SDS. The impact of the risk is quantified in part by how long you've been there.

    I personally do not think that the inside SDS, if you are leaving before April, pushes the risk level high. Others might disagree. But three years of history puts the impact of the risk quite high. The reward of one extra month on the contract is, in most cases, not that high.

    In balancing risk/reward, you look at the reward, the level of risk, and the impact of the risk. In the scenario of 3 years at risk, the impact is high, the risk IMO is low but not nothing, and the reward is not significant. I probably would not take the extra month. If I did, I would probably mitigate by operating it inside IR35.

    If someone had no reserves, and had another contract lined up to start in May, but no way to feed their family until then, then the reward of the extra month becomes high, doesn't it? So the risk/reward consideration might vary considerably from person to person.
    I was at previous client for three years working on a project, having had several extensions (intra project as took longer to complete than expected) - I got a contract review by Qdos - passed as outside. However, I never did the WP aspect as just relied upon the contract review and my own self declaration that I was also performing outside.

    They started to send emails around re: SDS. I got a bit nervous regarding this as (and rightly so as they said they wouldn't keep on any contractors after March 31st unless they did a CEST check - even then it appears they are still not taking on PSCs post April 6th as all the outsiders are not being kept on but those umbrella ones are). I left before they gave me an SDS as didn't want my name on an insider SDS list.

    Two weeks after I left they deemed them all inside - most are still there. I found another gig elsewhere outside and contract review by Qdos agreed. They are also going to provide a written SDS confirming me as outside post April. Although there is still that worry which you have highlighted as 1A) that they would be targeting my client- what in addition to a client SDS / Qdos contract review would help support the case in the event of an investigation?

    NB It's worth noting that I have only been at this client four months so if they did a retro look back, I'd only be liable for the four months prior to the client SDS affirmation and not anything past this coming April 6th.
    Last edited by CompoundOverload; 20th February 2020 at 18:27.

  4. #14

    More time posting than coding


    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    291

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iguy2008 View Post
    The client has asked me to extend for 1 more month to complete the project im working on (the same role that QDOS has reviewed as outside IR35).

    My understanding is that the client will not make an SDS statement but simply declare that they wlll not use PSC companies from April 6th.

    I have no plans to continue with the client after March 31st.
    If they are planning to simply ban PSC from April onwards and not doing any assessments ie. not creating any SDSs, then I can't see how this would ever increase your risk. It's actually probably the best position to be in if you plan to go end of March anyway as there's no talk about inside / outside, just a company policy change to not engage PSCs.

  5. #15

    Should post faster


    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    111

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dsc View Post
    If they are planning to simply ban PSC from April onwards and not doing any assessments ie. not creating any SDSs, then I can't see how this would ever increase your risk. It's actually probably the best position to be in if you plan to go end of March anyway as there's no talk about inside / outside, just a company policy change to not engage PSCs.
    I tried to explain this to my client, advised them to get an opinion on inside / outside, then take a policy decision. They instead decided to act on their opinion and issue an SDS, which I previously advised them would automatically trigger me issuing a dispute and no longer providing services beyond April 5th. I explained to them this was not a matter of immediate financial loss, but a risk assessment my PSC had carried out, in the same way my client has essentially carried out a risk assessment and just deemed everyone inside. Apparently they are unhappy risk assessments can be 2-way.

  6. #16

    More time posting than coding


    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    291

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LetterBox View Post
    I tried to explain this to my client, advised them to get an opinion on inside / outside, then take a policy decision. They instead decided to act on their opinion and issue an SDS, which I previously advised them would automatically trigger me issuing a dispute and no longer providing services beyond April 5th. I explained to them this was not a matter of immediate financial loss, but a risk assessment my PSC had carried out, in the same way my client has essentially carried out a risk assessment and just deemed everyone inside. Apparently they are unhappy risk assessments can be 2-way.
    I'm kind of going through this now, still waiting for a decision re in / out, but as my contract expires end of next week, I've just told them to give me an extension till end of March and said that this can be in place regardless of their ridiculously long IR35 assessment process (which is now to finish with some info early March). They are desperate to keep me on as it's the end of a massive project I've been heavily involved in (same story as everywhere I reckon), but of course I've already told them I'll be going end of March if the decision is anything different than outside. I kind of have a feeling that they think they can just stick me via umbrella and pay me more to match my rate, so I'll be having a conversation with them on Monday and telling them why this will not work. The only thing I'm not sure about is whether the determination which is to be done early March is going to be just an early indicator or an official SDS. If it's the latter than I'd have to do the same as you, issue a dispute / appeal / a written statement that I don't agree just as proof for the future and then go end of March.

  7. #17

    Should post faster


    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    111

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dsc View Post
    I'm kind of going through this now, still waiting for a decision re in / out, but as my contract expires end of next week, I've just told them to give me an extension till end of March and said that this can be in place regardless of their ridiculously long IR35 assessment process (which is now to finish with some info early March). They are desperate to keep me on as it's the end of a massive project I've been heavily involved in (same story as everywhere I reckon), but of course I've already told them I'll be going end of March if the decision is anything different than outside. I kind of have a feeling that they think they can just stick me via umbrella and pay me more to match my rate, so I'll be having a conversation with them on Monday and telling them why this will not work. The only thing I'm not sure about is whether the determination which is to be done early March is going to be just an early indicator or an official SDS. If it's the latter than I'd have to do the same as you, issue a dispute / appeal / a written statement that I don't agree just as proof for the future and then go end of March.
    I have an unofficial chat with the hire manager on Monday, will say I am looking to have my current contract terminated and am looking to secure an inside contract to continue, on the proviso that the SDS determination on my current position is rescinded, they have 2 weeks. If logic of the incorrect determination is lost on them, then I'll take a different track and offer them what appears a reasonable offer. My only interest is refuting the inside determination, I'm off at the end of March in any case.

  8. #18

    More time posting than coding


    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    291

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LetterBox View Post
    I have an unofficial chat with the hire manager on Monday, will say I am looking to have my current contract terminated and am looking to secure an inside contract to continue, on the proviso that the SDS determination on my current position is rescinded, they have 2 weeks. If logic of the incorrect determination is lost on them, then I'll take a different track and offer them what appears a reasonable offer. My only interest is refuting the inside determination, I'm off at the end of March in any case.
    But if the contract ends before the 6th of April then an SDS is not required, I reckon they can't grasp this?

    Btw I reckon SDSs get submitted to HMRC at some stage, is there some deadline by which they need to be submitted?

  9. #19

    Super poster


    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    2,940

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CompoundOverload View Post
    Although there is still that worry which you have highlighted as 1A) that they would be targeting my client- what in addition to a client SDS / Qdos contract review would help support the case in the event of an investigation?
    If they target your client, the liability isn't yours anyway. The risk is that the client changes its determination in response to HMRC investigation / pressure. If that happens, you'll have to choose whether to continue inside IR35, or leave. But you won't have historical risk, that's entirely the client's/fee-payer's risk. So the change to inside in your case, if it ever comes, would be safe. If you work 6 months outside and then they flip to inside, your 6 months outside was safe.

    The other risk is that they decide this is all a pain and just terminate your project or entirely staff it with permies.

    But the things that would help support the case are the same as they always have been. Emails that reveal a lack of SDC. Anything that shows distinctions between how you are treated and how permies are treated. Communications with their clients that clearly show you are not passing yourself off as an employee. Etc, etc, all the things you should have been keeping in your IR35 dossier for each contract previously.

    You don't keep these for your own protection anymore. You keep them now so that if an investigation ever comes, you give copies of it to your main client contact and say, 'You might want to pass this to Legal, it might help them.' It's the professional thing to do, and could make you very popular.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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