In my simple mind - the reason that Contractors are engaged rather than employed - is that End client does not want the obligations of employment.
(Holiday Pay, Sick Pay, Pensions etc
They want to be be able to "hire and fire" with minimal notice.
What then is the Mutuality of Obligation where there is a Contractor relationship?
Why are End Clients/Agents not using this as a reason to retain Contractors outside IR35?
Related resources
Replies (5)
Please login or register to join the discussion.
I'm not sure I understand your question, but if you are asking why contractors and clients don't just point to the lack of mutual obligation as definitive proof of contractor status, it's because there are other factors to consider (Google 'badges of trade')
Even where there is no contractual obligation, there are plenty of cases where the actual working practice has been used to award employee or worker status to 'contractors' (Google Uber employment case)
The Ready Made Concrete Case - which I understand to be the definitive case, said if any one of the following 3 is not present, there cannot be an Employment Relationship
Mutuality of Obligation
No Right of Substitution
No Right of Control
Therefore - as I see it - as there is No Mutuality Of Obligation - IR35 cannot apply.
I don't think that is what the judgment said, but it's your dollar...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ready_Mixed_Concrete_(South_East)_Ltd_v_Minister_of_Pensions_and_National_Insurance
(As others have said, any contract contains mutual obligations so just saying the words isn't a magic bullet, you have to look at the facts)
I have had not wholly dissimilar thoughts pass through my simple mind. The only thing that should really matter is the relationship between 'employer' and contractor. Somehow, this has become muddied by irrelevant questions such as whether the contractor has other clients. It's a small step from there to misapplying the tests on IR35.
I suspect the unmuddied truth is somewhere in the middle: some of the contractors you refer to should be taxed as employees; some of the IR35 cases aren't really within IR35.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploa...
This explains HMRCs view on MOO.