Client Confirmation letter of previous status

[LondonManc]

You're already with RS?

Sounds like you're almost under the bus already.

What makes you think your previous contract was outside IR35, other than you declaring it to be?

[jamesbrown]

WiB, that sort of statement is going to be mostly worthless in building a hypothetical contract at tribunal. The point of a CoA is to clarify/add flavour to the contractual terms w/r to the various IR35 pointers. Any blanket statement like that is close to worthless. Have you ever signed a contract that doesn't already have something like that w/r to being an independent contractor? The contract already states the view of both parties in general terms.

If the OP wants to make some effort in doing something to clarify their historical status, then they should collect evidence of that status, which will most definitely hold weight, unlike a general statement akin to what the contract probably already contains.

[LondonManc]

The only thing you could do to reduce risk is suggest you swap agencies with someone from a different agency...

That may not have much impact but it would stop you appearing on the most obvious "who could we look at" reports

Eh? They're canning PSCs. Going PAYE through a different agent would be like asking your wife to cheat with a different fella.

This is in reference to the current LtdCo contract and its working arrangements. In an effort to reduce look back risk, and have something to send back to them if I were to get a fishing letter in the future.

A fishing letter? It's an initiation of investigation. They don't ask you if you want to be investigated.
What have you previously done to confirm that your contract was/is outside IR35?

[northernladuk]

Eh? They're canning PSCs. Going PAYE through a different agent would be like asking your wife to cheat with a different fella.
?

Oi.. Don't you be spoiling it. I'm on a good thing here.

[WordIsBond]

WiB, that sort of statement is going to be mostly worthless in building a hypothetical contract at tribunal. The point of a CoA is to clarify/add flavour to the contractual terms w/r to the various IR35 pointers. Any blanket statement like that is close to worthless. Have you ever signed a contract that doesn't already have something like that w/r to being an independent contractor? The contract already states the view of both parties in general terms.

If the OP wants to make some effort in doing something to clarify their historical status, then they should collect evidence of that status, which will most definitely hold weight, unlike a general statement akin to what the contract probably already contains.

The statement is worth one thing -- to negate any HMRC argument that the new engagement proves he should have been inside historically.

It's like all the other little things you put in your IR35 dossier to show you aren't controlled, are in business for yourself, etc. I've got lots of pieces of paper that strengthen one of my arguments or refute a potential HMRC argument. Few of those pieces of paper are all that weighty in and of themselves.

If OP didn't have the kind of evidence you describe, he's in trouble no matter what. But if he does have that evidence, he doesn't want to lose a case anyway because a tribunal listens to HMRC arguing that his current engagement proves his old one was inside IR35.

[WordIsBond]

Oi.. Don't you be spoiling it. I'm on a good thing here.

You like the guy she's cheating with?

[northernladuk]

You like the guy she's cheating with?

Hmm OK. Not quite what I meant...

[jamesbrown]

The statement is worth one thing -- to negate any HMRC argument that the new engagement proves he should have been inside historically.

It's like all the other little things you put in your IR35 dossier to show you aren't controlled, are in business for yourself, etc. I've got lots of pieces of paper that strengthen one of my arguments or refute a potential HMRC argument. Few of those pieces of paper are all that weighty in and of themselves.

If OP didn't have the kind of evidence you describe, he's in trouble no matter what. But if he does have that evidence, he doesn't want to lose a case anyway because a tribunal listens to HMRC arguing that his current engagement proves his old one was inside IR35.

But it does so no more effectively than the contract, and considerably less so than evidence about actual WPs.

The contract states the historical relationship, together with the actual working practices, which together inform the hypothetical contract. No general statement from the client about future arrangements is going to change that. If the OP were moving from outside to inside under the same T&Cs, then that would factor into the hypothetical contract because it involves a change in the tax status of the same worker under the same hypothetical contract. A tribunal is not going to be focused on general statements about other workers, especially after the OP has rejected those terms explicitly and they have direct evidence about the WPs as they were understood at the time the hypothetical contract applied.

By all means, acquire a CoA, if possible, but use one of the standard templates, which will be signed and dated. In practice, I cannot see why the client would offer one in the situation described. They mostly don't understand these reforms and their legal and compliance people aren't going to let them mess around with any unnecessary pseudo-legalese in that context.

[Tertius]

You're already with RS?

Sounds like you're almost under the bus already.

What makes you think your previous contract was outside IR35, other than you declaring it to be?

QDOS and Abbey Tax assessments both confirm it. Also have QDOS insurance.

[jamesbrown]

QDOS and Abbey Tax assessments both confirm it. Also have QDOS insurance.

Then you've done your due diligence, well done. You're also walking (I assume). Beyond collecting actual evidence about your WPs, there's nothing more to do (except hope for the best).