Reply to: outside IR35 before..inside after?

[headsy]

Do you want the stress of potentially going to court to explain yourself along with the cost of that and the cost of the penalty you could have to pay if tribunal rules against you? Also with no support from your client as they will say they were compliant by assessing you essentially throwing you under the bus...

[dsc]

No one knows what the risk is, but the reality is HMRC seems to ignore CEST results when it suits them and not give a toss about what the contracts say - again, when it suits them. Client can easily throw you under the bus at any point by saying for example that they would never accept a substitute even though they said they would. In my opinion it depends how much risk you can live with and how paranoid you are. The bottom line is that they can always investigate you, but moving to PAYE after being somewhere for a long time seems to be seen as saying that you've been an employee all this time (I'm sure some would argue that is bollocks).

How big is the client and how come all the contracts where the same? Is it simply the same task being done whilst being moved from project to project?

[Scruffles]

Hi. Ive been reading this forum with great interest so far and would like to say its been extremely helpful while grappling with IR35 so thanks to all involved.

My role has been deemed inside so they want me to switch through the agency PAYE (blanket decision some people have been found outside on the working practices review and they are still telling them they are inside). Not been told about any rate cut or full details yet. I am in a position to jack it in for a while however as its only speculation at this point regarding retrospective IR35 investigations I am considering switching to the Agency. Ive been working for this client for a few years now. Have had multiple contracts essentially exactly the same with a few months break between one of them. Do you think there is a high risk of a potential investigation being followed up if the following criteria has been met and documented?

1) Contract and working practices review deemed outside IR35
2) Client signed off on a working practices review which confirms my working practice answers
3) CEST tool advises outside
4) MVL LTD

My main concerns are that after I quit I cant find work..... or get investigated six months later anyway when I have no money left.

[Scruffles]

Hi. Ive been reading this forum with great interest so far and would like to say its been extremely helpful while grappling with IR35 so thanks to all involved.

My role has been deemed inside so they want me to switch through the agency PAYE (blanket decision some people have been found outside on the working practices review and they are still telling them they are inside). Not been told about any rate cut or full details yet. I am in a position to jack it in for a while however as its only speculation at this point regarding retrospective IR35 investigations I am considering switching to the Agency. Ive been working for this client for a few years now. Have had multiple contracts essentially exactly the same with a few months break between one of them. Do you think there is a high risk of a potential investigation being followed up if the following criteria has been met and documented?

1) Contract and working practices review deemed outside IR35
2) Client signed off on a working practices review which confirms my working practice answers
3) CEST tool advises outside

My main concerns are that after I quit I cant find work..... or get investigated six months later anyway when I have no money left.

[jamesbrown]

I'd be very interested to see a Qdos comment on this Ʌ

Read their T&Cs, which are available online. There is a clause in there w/r to a "reasonable chance of success". This is pretty standard and not designed to catch you out, but they are also fully aware of the sunk cost fallacy and they aren't going to pursue an unwinnable case.

[Skint]

Only if they win the investigation. If there is little chance of success then they won't even contend it.

I'd be very interested to see a Qdos comment on this Ʌ

[ladymuck]

And it's only advice. The client can hear it, nod and smile, and go nah - we don't want people being all independent minded.

[northernladuk]

PMSL! I didn't ask for a definition, I asked what he meant by it.

He means they'd advise the client on how to treat contractors, the difference between permies and contractors and what the contractual terms are and what they mean etc.

If they have a contractor on site and they want him to do what they want and won't accept a sub then it's a bad position. QDOS would educate them around statement of works, requirement to allow substitution to which the client agrees and the IR35 situation is improved.

[beatfreak]

Make better.

PMSL! I didn't ask for a definition, I asked what he meant by it.

[northernladuk]

Please clarify what you mean by “improve”?

Make better.

[beatfreak]

Sorry, not sure I follow. The only advice we'll ever give to a company is how to improve their IR35 position.

Are you suggesting that we're advising companies on how to change things to put contractors inside IR35?

Seb

Please clarify what you mean by “improve”?

[Qdos Contractor]

That's odd, in your previous post you stated "I think there's probably a bit more to this than meets the eye. I don't know who the parties involved are, but we're certainly not advising companies on how to ensure contractors are inside IR35." Surely that's exactly what you stated in your most recent post? If you are recommending changes to contracts, policies or working practices which result in a different status determination that IS what you are doing! Disingenuous?

Sorry, not sure I follow. The only advice we'll ever give to a company is how to improve their IR35 position.

Are you suggesting that we're advising companies on how to change things to put contractors inside IR35?

Seb

[beatfreak]

If we're doing audit work for companies we will review where things are currently and provide recommendations on changes (whether it be contracts, policies or working practices). Generally we will only start the individual determination process once a company has had the opportunity to implement our recommendations.

That's odd, in your previous post you stated "I think there's probably a bit more to this than meets the eye. I don't know who the parties involved are, but we're certainly not advising companies on how to ensure contractors are inside IR35." Surely that's exactly what you stated in your most recent post? If you are recommending changes to contracts, policies or working practices which result in a different status determination that IS what you are doing! Disingenuous?

[Kanaiya]

Only if they win the investigation. If there is little chance of success then they won't even contend it.

Ohhh. But I have the insurance. I was told by qdos they will pay retrospective.



Sent from my iPhone using Contractor UK Forum

[Qdos Contractor]

Can I just ask whether any consultancy that is provided by Qdos regarding IR35 is based on current working practices and contracts or potential working practices/contracts for the next financial year?

If we're doing audit work for companies we will review where things are currently and provide recommendations on changes (whether it be contracts, policies or working practices). Generally we will only start the individual determination process once a company has had the opportunity to implement our recommendations.