End of IT contracting this June?

[ChimpMaster]

The sky might not fall but contractors take home pay will - by up to 20%.

Perhaps not, if you stick together and force the government's hand. All they want to show is that they are bringing in more tax receipts. What they won't show to the public is the extra cost of paying PS contractors to stay on.

[DotasScandal]

Perhaps not, if you stick together and...

[Craic]

Does anyone know what plans IPSE have to fight this? We don't know if these IR35 changes will be rolled out in the private sector or not but it would be best to be prepared.

It would be best to lobby against them beforehand as, once they are announced, it will be hard to put the genie back in the bottle as that would be considered a Government climbdown.

It would be best to get them to quietly drop the changes beforehand.

[Fred Bloggs]

Does anyone know what plans IPSE have to fight this? We don't know if these IR35 changes will be rolled out in the private sector or not but it would be best to be prepared.

It would be best to lobby against them beforehand as, once they are announced, it will be hard to put the genie back in the bottle as that would be considered a Government climbdown.

It would be best to get them to quietly drop the changes beforehand.

That's the best post I've seen in ages. I'll tell you what the plans are. They will have cozy fire side chats with a cup of tea in the mistaken belief that since they got invited to the corridors of power they are to be taken seriously. Spreadsheet Phil, will turn to his secretary afterwards and say "thank f**k we got them out of the way quickly. Business as usual, Sir Humphrey". In the meantime, back at IPSE Towers they'll be busy patting themselves on the back telling each other on the IPSE forum what a jolly good job they are doing and how lucky all those contractors are to have them looking after them, lobbying for all those employment rights that nobody wants. Snag, is the last couple of years, the new fire side chat strategy just hasn't worked. Normally, when a strategy doesn't work, you go back to the old strategy that worked well for about 15 years or so. They just do not seem able to grasp the scale of the failure that the fire side chat policy has been. I think that covers it.

[malvolio]

That's the best post I've seen in ages. I'll tell you what the plans are. They will have cozy fire side chats with a cup of tea in the mistaken belief that since they got invited to the corridors of power they are to be taken seriously. Spreadsheet Phil, will turn to his secretary afterwards and say "thank f**k we got them out of the way quickly. Business as usual, Sir Humphrey". In the meantime, back at IPSE Towers they'll be busy patting themselves on the back telling each other on the IPSE forum what a jolly good job they are doing and how lucky all those contractors are to have them looking after them, lobbying for all those employment rights that nobody wants. Snag, is the last couple of years, the new fire side chat strategy just hasn't worked. Normally, when a strategy doesn't work, you go back to the old strategy that worked well for about 15 years or so. They just do not seem able to grasp the scale of the failure that the fire side chat policy has been. I think that covers it.

Has it occurred to you (or have you simply not bothered to look) that multiple major organisations as well as IPSE have explained in great detail to HMG why this is a monumentally stupid and financially illiterate idea. How would you move on if HMG simply ignore everything they are being told?

Also, it's easy to do to the Public Sector where there are no shareholders to upset. It is enormously more difficult to do it to the private one. "Sorry, Mr Corporate party sponsor, I've just put your cost of employment up by 30% and killed off your flexible workforce". That would really work, wouldn't it?

Incidentally, IPSE have told St Teresa to her face it's a bad idea. Biscuits were not provided.

[DotasScandal]

That's the best post I've seen in ages. I'll tell you what the plans are. They will have cozy fire side chats with a cup of tea in the mistaken belief that since they got invited to the corridors of power they are to be taken seriously. Spreadsheet Phil, will turn to his secretary afterwards and say "thank f**k we got them out of the way quickly. Business as usual, Sir Humphrey". In the meantime, back at IPSE Towers they'll be busy patting themselves on the back telling each other on the IPSE forum what a jolly good job they are doing and how lucky all those contractors are to have them looking after them, lobbying for all those employment rights that nobody wants. Snag, is the last couple of years, the new fire side chat strategy just hasn't worked. Normally, when a strategy doesn't work, you go back to the old strategy that worked well for about 15 years or so. They just do not seem able to grasp the scale of the failure that the fire side chat policy has been. I think that covers it.

Thanks for writing my post for me!

[Fred Bloggs]

Thanks for writing my post for me!

Very welcome.

[SussexSeagull]

I am sure it wasn't for the want of trying but the current government aren't listening to IPSE or anyone else who suggest that not grabbing as much tax as possible might help the economy in other areas.

The upcoming Taylor report will be interesting but I fear it will try and align employment and tax status which ultimately contractor don't want.

[AtW]

Govt cut corp tax and it intends to claw back a lot via other taxes - there is no amount of talking would change it, they don't care if companies will have to increase rates - if anything that would get Govt more tax, no amount of lobbying would change it

[malvolio]

Govt cut corp tax and it intends to claw back a lot via other taxes - there is no amount of talking would change it, they don't care if companies will have to increase rates - if anything that would get Govt more tax, no amount of lobbying would change it

No. Cutting CT is a bid to bring more business into the UK and so push up overall tax revenues. Our rates are not really part of that equation.