• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Here's a thing...

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #11
    Originally posted by eek View Post
    Point 1 is a nasty one there that even I hadn't thought about...
    This was brought up in the latest round of the HoL committee, I think by the meeja person.

    If HMRC goes after the employer, the employer will then seek to recoup the costs from the contractor, who might have closed his LtdCo by this time.
    Originally posted by Stevie Wonder Boy
    I can't see any way to do it can you please advise?

    I want my account deleted and all of my information removed, I want to invoke my right to be forgotten.

    Comment


      #12
      Originally posted by SimonMac View Post
      This was brought up in the latest round of the HoL committee, I think by the meeja person.

      If HMRC goes after the employer, the employer will then seek to recoup the costs from the contractor, who might have closed his LtdCo by this time.
      How?

      This is HMRC chasing the agency / end client for money from a contract that finished in say March 2020 and was signed in April 2019. You would be very hard pushed to transfer employment NI down to the contractor as there would be nothing in that contract that could be used - and while I know there are transfer conditions appearing in newer contracts the terms I've seen would probably be thrown out of court as you can't contract for something that isn't legal.
      Last edited by eek; 26 February 2020, 09:47.
      merely at clientco for the entertainment

      Comment


        #13
        Originally posted by eek View Post
        Point 1 is a nasty one there that even I hadn't thought about...
        Point 1 is moot - it wasn't a ClientCo determination beforehand.

        There are several options here though:
        • The client could/should significantly change the contract
        • The client could/should significantly change the working practices
        • The contractor could/should alter their working practices


        Not only that, but if a contractor has a QDOS reviewed contract and working practices from before, then there's little issue, especially if those working practices are signed off by the client.

        As has been said elsewhere, though, it looks like clients will simply abdicate all future responsibility on engagement of PSCs. The model is deda except for those specialists who should have been outside all along and will remain so. I would expect outside contracts and inside FTCs to be the future operating model.
        The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world that he didn't exist

        Comment


          #14
          Originally posted by Paralytic View Post
          I also notice reference to a 2002 case with for John Williams. Does anyone know whatever happened to him?
          No, but I'll bet he'd have a few interesting tales to tell us about his experiences if he was a member here!

          Comment


            #15
            Originally posted by Snooky View Post
            No, but I'll bet he'd have a few interesting tales to tell us about his experiences if he was a member here!
            I imagine an experience like that might send you a bit crazy and you'd end up posting about it all the time, so it is probably best that that does not happen.

            Comment


              #16
              Originally posted by LondonManc View Post
              Point 1 is moot - it wasn't a ClientCo determination beforehand.

              There are several options here though:
              • The client could/should significantly change the contract
              • The client could/should significantly change the working practices
              • The contractor could/should alter their working practices


              Not only that, but if a contractor has a QDOS reviewed contract and working practices from before, then there's little issue, especially if those working practices are signed off by the client.

              As has been said elsewhere, though, it looks like clients will simply abdicate all future responsibility on engagement of PSCs. The model is deda except for those specialists who should have been outside all along and will remain so. I would expect outside contracts and inside FTCs to be the future operating model.
              I don't think it's moot -

              1) remember our biggest concern is retrospective action.
              2) Barristers have to have some reason beyond asking for money for saying this thing is plausible.
              3) If the client is saying that post April the contractor is inside what changed before - if the client think he is inside, surely he always been inside and therefore Employer NI (if no else) was due. That to me sounds like a case where HMRC could more profitably chase companies (we have 700 other cases to take into account) compared to individual contractors..
              Last edited by eek; 26 February 2020, 10:33.
              merely at clientco for the entertainment

              Comment


                #17
                Originally posted by eek View Post
                I don't think it's moot -

                1) remember our biggest concern is retrospective action.
                2) Barristers have to have some reason beyond asking for money for saying this thing is plausible.
                3) If the client is saying that post April the contractor is inside what changed before - if the client think he is inside, surely he always been inside and therefore Employer NI (if no else) is due. That to me sounds like a case HMRC could more profitably chase compared to individual contractors..
                Pre-April, it's not the client's determination, it's the contractor's. The liability is therefore with the MyCo, not the ClientCo. While I understand your point, I cannot see it happening. That said, clients who don't get IR35 will have brought this upon themselves if they do get stiffed.
                The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world that he didn't exist

                Comment


                  #18
                  Originally posted by LondonManc View Post
                  Pre-April, it's not the client's determination, it's the contractor's. The liability is therefore with the MyCo, not the ClientCo. While I understand your point, I cannot see it happening. That said, clients who don't get IR35 will have brought this upon themselves if they do get stiffed.
                  True, but if HMRC want money which side is more likely to pay up - the large firm that while it will fight is fighting over a very large sum of money or the individual against a PSC that has already closed.

                  While in theory it's the latter - to HMRC the former is a far easier target to hit (and one we've never even thought about#)..
                  merely at clientco for the entertainment

                  Comment


                    #19
                    Originally posted by eek View Post
                    True, but if HMRC want money which side is more likely to pay up - the large firm that while it will fight is fighting over a very large sum of money or the individual against a PSC that has already closed.

                    While in theory it's the latter - to HMRC the former is a far easier target to hit (and one we've never even thought about#)..
                    Hint: ClientCo can afford better lawyers than PSC
                    The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world that he didn't exist

                    Comment


                      #20
                      Originally posted by LondonManc View Post
                      Hint: ClientCo can afford better lawyers than PSC
                      Yep but the payoff is £bns once HMRC have won the first case - might be worth it.

                      And the issue here is that IR35 doesn't solve the gig economy fake self-employment racket and that's what the end game is about because the obvious approach of moving employer NI into income tax can't occur, it has to be hidden.
                      merely at clientco for the entertainment

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X