If a contractor was claiming to be working outside IR35 and then migrates to the new rules and the client issues them their SDS which deems them to be inside IR35, then if that contractor then continues inside IR35 then yes HMRC could argue that nothing has really changed and the contractor could have been inside all along. HMRC could then pursue the contractor for back taxes. HMRC has stated that they wont do so up front but who on earth believes that!
Uber lose battle in Supreme Court on drivers right
- Thread starter Bald-Eagle22
- Start date
If a contractor was claiming to be working outside IR35 and then migrates to the new rules and the client issues them their SDS which deems them to be inside IR35, then if that contractor then continues inside IR35 then yes HMRC could argue that nothing has really changed and the contractor could have been inside all along. HMRC could then pursue the contractor for back taxes. HMRC has stated that they wont do so up front but who on earth believes that!
Seen the comment above about self employed and working hours, Uber does actually place restrictions on the hours a driver can work (capped) and doesn’t offer a right of substitution which to me is the cornerstone of any self employed argument
i think the capped hour is to be compliant with EU working hour condition. even when self employed, the company can only give you work based on their maximum allowance hours that needs to be complainet with EU (now UK) laws.
regarding the rights to substitution, i dont beleive that is absolutely necessary or a red line criteria as the argument is that if you do very specialised work then the argument is that there is no substitution with suitbale qualification. with respect to IR35 qualitifcation, this requirement is a like a nice to have as opposed to must have.
Or the one at Hemel Hempstead, but both Swindon’s and Hemel’s would be a walk-in the park compared with Place Charles de Gaulle, formerly Place de l’Étoile at l’Arc de Triomphe.
You say that special instance but roadworks and/or couple of signs to indicate diversions can be slapped down anywhere.
Won't it be fun to experience how software is limited by its sensors and imagination of its coders in the form of 1t+ vehicles on the road.
the problem with the magic roundabout is humans. If all cars were self driving those problems would not exist as they would follow the required rules and logic for negotiating such a monstrosity.
Uber have agreed to minimum wage and a holiday pay topup (I wonder how many will actually use that money to take a holiday).
Uber were clever though, it only applies whilst you have an active fare. Which means you were almost definitely earning minimum wage for that time anyway.
Uber were clever though, it only applies whilst you have an active fare. Which means you were almost definitely earning minimum wage for that time anyway.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2005
- Posts
- 12,671
Yeah if they're all communicating with each other there should be zero crashes apart from a result of mechanical/computer failure
The question now is will that stand up because I believe the court ruling stated they were a worker as soon as they logged into the app. More interesting times ahead and Uber have made the first move.
Stationary objects (unexpected/unidentified), people, animals, etc, all disagree with you
First? Hasn't HMRC been knocking on the door for some time about the the billions in tax that Uber hasn't paid and doesn't have.
They have made the first post lawsuit move to try and address the finding of the court.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2005
- Posts
- 12,671
Stationary objects (unexpected/unidentified), people, animals, etc, all disagree with you
That's all part of the computer to deal with
I suspect Uber have lots of evidence from their staff that they don't want their time to be managed when they are logged into the app, they want the freedom to accept or decline jobs etc to remain, to choose when they log in or don't etc, which would absolutely be required to change in order to make payment while logged in a viable approach, and will use this to justify their approach.
Otherwise people would all log in at quiet times, in quiet locations, and reject the rare incoming jobs, all the while getting paid for doing so, which is ridiculous.
It will be interesting as it isn't really up to what the drivers want it's up to what the court decides, I assume normal cab companies have a way of managing the number of drivers on at any given time to match demand so maybe uber will be forced to move to a slightly different model. Like I said interesting times, Uber have already gone further than many people suggested they would as the initial argument was this only applied historically to a small number of drivers yet they have now made a fundamental change to the way they operate.
Associate
- Joined
- 22 Sep 2007
- Posts
- 2,184
- Location
- Abingdon
Are these Uber drivers going to have to pay their full NI + PAYE plus items claimed back as expenses (petrol + car maintenance) as they were actually employees over the past few years? I'm not sure this is going to work out so well for them considering the tax benefits of being self-employed.
Uber has announced today they will be paying minimum wage only when drivers have fares and not while they are logged on. Lots of comments saying Uber cant do that and are cherry picking the SC ruling and since they are employees they will require paying from when they log into the app. I expect further court cases.
I just cant see how this is going to work or how Uber are going to solve this.