You might also be interested in
Replies (55)
Please login or register to join the discussion.
That's an interesting concept that I hadn't considered. I really don't know if it would have made a difference. I guess that's a question for the legal eagles here.
Once we get beyond April 2020, there are unlikely to be many SDS's on contractors.
Rather, the SDS result will be known BEFORE the contractor accepts or rejects the contract offer.
In some areas, contractors will have to accept they have to like it or lump it. But, in areas where there is a shortage of skilled contractors, end-clients will look for ways to get an outside-IR35 verdict or risk seeing the contractor go elsewhere.
I think that, after the initial panic, end-clients will start to realise there are ways around the problem, just as contractors found out after 2000.
Hopefully it won't go much further. Sajid Javid said a few years back that the "silly" IR35 should be scrapped. I know that Philip Hammond criticised it when it came in and he also said people were entitled to certainty over their tax affairs before going along happily with the retrospective loan charge... however we live in hope that sanity will prevail at some point.
No one should be taxed as an employee without receiving the benefits of employment - paid holidays, sick pay, pension etc. That would put an end to all this nonsense. You want someone to be an employee. pay the employer's NIC and the benefits
that's all I've been saying for the past 19 years. But there are those who refused to accept this message. Times are now changing.
Mr Webber is correct, case law has moved on, but in the direction of benefit to the worker. I contend my 2002 case might have had a different result if it were held now.