You might also be interested in
Replies (3)
Please login or register to join the discussion.
Simon, you're missing the point.
It is not up to HMRC to decide employment status it is something that is decided between the work giver and the worker.
There are no "disguised" self-employed. There is no law, just guidelines which have been interpreted one way or another over the years by tribunal. The only reason tribunal got involved was because HMRC wanted more money. Prior to Gordon Brown things were pretty smooth with the odd hiccup. Now look, IR35, (what a total mess that is - taking away Limited Company status) quarterly accounts that are meaningless (the only reason for it is to put the SE onto RTI.
I think Simon has made a very real point here. The definition of self-employed should not include those who work long-term for a single "client" aka "employer". These people should get taxed as employees and gain employment rights.
What we absolutely need to avoid is the ridiculous situation where tax, pension, NI and other rules apply inconsistently so that someone is effectively an employee for some purposes and not others. Either someone is employed and gets all the rights of employment and is taxed accordingly or someone is genuinely self-employed and gets none of those rights and is taxed accordingly. There should be no middle-ground.
There is no definition of self-employed. Yes you are quite right there is no middle ground. Only HMRC want there to be middle ground to extract maximum tax and nic.
There is no such thing as being genuinely self-employed or disguised self employment. It's all spin by HMRC.