Soldato
Why?I don’t think this was handled well at all. They should just put taxes up on those outside of IR35 so it’s more balanced and fairer.
That’s a very terrible idea
Why?I don’t think this was handled well at all. They should just put taxes up on those outside of IR35 so it’s more balanced and fairer.
My auntie operates outside of IR35 but her "employer" still tries to treat her as if she works within IR35. She games it to the max (as she doesn't really need the cash), only working when she choses to lol.I'm not a contractor but I did see the impact it had on my industry when they introduced it (Financial IT). To avoid the risk of classifying contractors incorrectly many companies simply stopped employing them and tried to convert them to permies. Where people wouldn't convert to lower paid permanent roles the jobs were moved to India.
So when Kamikwazi announced the repeal I thought it was a great idea and likely to spark growth in the contract market again. As I am between jobs it even got me thinking about contracting. Sadly now the repeal has been reinstated I see lots of hopes dashed and an opportunity for growth in that sector thrown away.
That is taking the ****I witnessed the same thing though - lots of contractors disappeared. But in all fairness, they were definitely not contractors by the usual definition (10+ years in the same role etc..). They'd also furlough them every year for 2 weeks to correct the FTE/headcount numbers.
Yes I've seen the same many times over the years. Contractors working at banks, for example, for a decade. Those people were definitely disguised employees. Unfortunately the net result of it, and the government reacting to it, was to decimate the genuine contractor market and move jobs overseas. I keep thinking there must have been a better way to recoup the lost tax on disguised employees that didn't kill the market and reduce flexibility for businesses.I witnessed the same thing though - lots of contractors disappeared. But in all fairness, they were definitely not contractors by the usual definition (10+ years in the same role etc..). They'd also furlough them every year for 2 weeks to correct the FTE/headcount numbers.
I don't think HMRC has the resources now to chase them down, one of many budget cuts most likely!I've also worked with permitractors spanning years in the same role. Has anyone ever heard of them being reported or caught out? Not sure how that works.
Also, I personally know people who worked as contractors for hmrcI don't think HMRC has the resources now to chase them down, one of many budget cuts most likely!
I've also worked with permitractors spanning years in the same role. Has anyone ever heard of them being reported or caught out? Not sure how that works.
Same!Also, I personally know people who worked as contractors for hmrc
Working for years in and of itself does not mean they are a disguised employee, it is dependent on their working practices
Let me pick one that works where I do. IT role.
They attend organised company events and social gatherings.
They report to a line manager which is the same as many employees who completely dictates what that persons work is, how, where and when it is done and to what time.
They have to abide by the exact same SLAs as employees and are not doing project work. They cover BAU requests and general day to day tickets and have seemingly endless work available.
They have rigid fixed working hours and location set by the employer, to which they cover a shift pattern.
They use all company facilities and equipment in the same way employees do and attend company update meetings about how well the company is doing.
It doesn't look good though if you get investigated and you've been working for the same client for multiple years in a row with no other ones. But yeah technically, it isn't a breach in itself.As I said, its dependent on working practices. That person clearly fails on quite a few of the rules HMRC set out for disguised employees. That still doesnt counter what I said
It doesn't look good though if you get investigated and you've been working for the same client for multiple years in a row with no other ones. But yeah technically, it isn't a breach in itself.
Yeah I've always wondered about the substitution thing. Given that 99% of all contractors that I have known have worked alone as part of their limited company, not one of them could have genuinely provided substitution ever, so how does that work? Say you get ill? Is it only a problem if you get investigated or is there some loop hole I am unaware of, like the right to find a substitute within reasonable time, but then terminate your contract with said client or whatever?Agreed, it doesnt look good but so long as you can prove that you dont fall foul of Direction and Control, MOO and have a genuine Right of Substitution and not become part and parcel of the company then as you say, technically there isnt a breach despite working at a place for years
Yeah I've always wondered about the substitution thing. Given that 99% of all contractors that I have known have worked alone as part of their limited company, not one of them could have genuinely provided substitution ever, so how does that work? Say you get ill? Is it only a problem if you get investigated or is there some loop hole I am unaware of, like the right to find a substitute within reasonable time, but then terminate your contract with said client or whatever?
Please tell me he has an annual performance review.Let me pick one that works where I do. IT role.
They attend organised company events and social gatherings.
They report to a line manager which is the same as many employees who completely dictates what that persons work is, how, where and when it is done and to what time.
They have to abide by the exact same SLAs as employees and are not doing project work. They cover BAU requests and general day to day tickets and have seemingly endless work available.
They have rigid fixed working hours and location set by the employer, to which they cover a shift pattern.
They use all company facilities and equipment in the same way employees do and attend company update meetings about how well the company is doing.
Let me pick one that works where I do. IT role.
They attend organised company events and social gatherings.
They report to a line manager which is the same as many employees who completely dictates what that persons work is, how, where and when it is done and to what time.
They have to abide by the exact same SLAs as employees and are not doing project work. They cover BAU requests and general day to day tickets and have seemingly endless work available.
They have rigid fixed working hours and location set by the employer, to which they cover a shift pattern.
They use all company facilities and equipment in the same way employees do and attend company update meetings about how well the company is doing.
No because in the traditional sense he would have a "statement of work" with a deadline.So does that mean my builder who is going to rennovate my property is a inside IR35 disquised employee?
Im technically his line manager and i tell him what to do and when.
I also gave him a deadline too.
Yup which i also get with my contractsNo because in the traditional sense he would have a "statement of work" with a deadline.