Blanket IR35 Determination / "HR Policy Against PSC's"

[Lance]

That does not, in itself, make it more likely that that period of time will be found to have been inside.

pedantry time again. I think it does make it more likely.

Chances of being found to have been inside all along if you're not investigated is zero.
If you are investigated the chances increase infinitely. Seeing as the view that moving from outside to inside increases the chance of an investigation then it does seem more likely.

[Paralytic]

pedantry time again. I think it does make it more likely.

Chances of being found to have been inside all along if you're not investigated is zero.
If you are investigated the chances increase infinitely. Seeing as the view that moving from outside to inside increases the chance of an investigation then it does seem more likely.

Definitely pedantry. Point I was making is that getting investigated just because you've gone from self-determined outside to Umbrella (via PSC ban), does not introduce any risk of being found inside compared to being investigated for any other reason. ie. the act of moving to Umbrella does not make what you did previously more likely to be found inside - an IR35 determination from a client obviously would do.

[win10]

pedantry time again. I think it does make it more likely.

Chances of being found to have been inside all along if you're not investigated is zero.
If you are investigated the chances increase infinitely. Seeing as the view that moving from outside to inside increases the chance of an investigation then it does seem more likely.

I dont think continuing via umbrella for the same client is automatically equal to being inside IR35. Especially without determination from the client. One may want to work via umbrella for numerous reasons not related to ir35 and indeed ir35 to be irrelevant.
Of course it is hard to argue either way now - this must be tested in court.

[GhostofTarbera]

So my question was is anyone else in this situation and what are people actually doing.. The answers are mostly all whether semantics around the wording are right / what is legal or lawful..

In the same way the tax loophole exploited by the loan charge scheme wasn't in the "spirit" of the legislation, I feel the banning contractors via an HR policy is also not in the spirit of the new proposed legislation and eventually, a lot of these big corps will have their wrists slapped. The intention from HMRC is to get individual status assessments done, and get people working in a manner they see is fair. (whether how they see it is right or not, is another matter)

I'll speak to my accountant. I have to weigh up whether NIC's and other back tax 9 months of my day rate is worth risking for another few months of a slightly reduced rate to close out my project.

98% of banking contractors rolled over and work via umbrellas now when exactly the same was rolled out last year

Nothing to do with IR35 status, they are not telling you are inside IR35 now are they ?



Sent from my iPhone using Contractor UK Forum

[xar18]

My client banned PSCs back in April (Asset Mngt in Edinburgh) - either FTC, Agency Payroll (if they offer), or Umbrella are the options. Went through a whole justification process, but it was a whitewash. I organised a group of core experienced contractors to speak to the IR35 project leads about options, but they weren't interested. The decision was already made, the project was purely to implement and cover their backs. They have no interest in 'managing' outside IR35 in any capacity.

[mattfx]

Sorry, yes, I should've been more clear.

The communications quite clearly state that you have to either go "PAYE" or umbrella. The ClientCo in question are banning the use of PSC's, they aren't determining IR35 status.

I spoke with my accountant. Their view is that someone could want to go under an umbrella for a number of reasons, and that it doesn't indicate whether you are, or aren't, were or were not, inside IR35.

Even *if* Hector did link the two engagements together, they'd have a tough time coming after this particular role I've been doing for IR35; I've had other clients which I've billed in the same time period, been WFH the whole time and ultimately everything has been super flexible. There will be far easier catches elsewhere.

TLDR; ClientCo is banning PSC's, not determining status.

[eek]

Sorry, yes, I should've been more clear.

The communications quite clearly state that you have to either go "PAYE" or umbrella. The ClientCo in question are banning the use of PSC's, they aren't determining IR35 status.

I spoke with my accountant. Their view is that someone could want to go under an umbrella for a number of reasons, and that it doesn't indicate whether you are, or aren't, were or were not, inside IR35.

Even *if* Hector did link the two engagements together, they'd have a tough time coming after this particular role I've been doing for IR35; I've had other clients which I've billed in the same time period, been WFH the whole time and ultimately everything has been super flexible. There will be far easier catches elsewhere.

TLDR; ClientCo is banning PSC's, not determining status.

None of that actually matters - HMRC have successfully claimed someone is inside for a 1/2 day a fortnight consulting role...

And it's worth repeating - my actual concern would be a shake the tree operation (ala Glaxo) to see what money HMRC can get. I can't see major IR35 investigations coming from it but I can see an attempt to recover money while dismissing anyone who puts up a decent excuse.

[cojak]

TLDR; ClientCo is banning PSC's, not determining status.

And there you have it. Perfectly legal and acceptable to HMRC.

Now all you have to do is to decide your level of appetite for risk.

That's it - no more, no less.

[northernladuk]

Even *if* Hector did link the two engagements together, they'd have a tough time coming after this particular role I've been doing for IR35; I've had other clients which I've billed in the same time period, been WFH the whole time and ultimately everything has been super flexible. There will be far easier catches elsewhere. .

You realise none of that is a factor in an IR35 decision don't you?

[Superfly]

I have been offered a contract role with a client that will be determining everyone inside come April. It is also a role I have worked on in the past in a permanent capacity. If I was to join, it would be through an umbrella right from the start.

Are there any risks associated with taking up such a role that is determined inside IR35? Is there a likelihood that this determination be scaled across previous contracts?