Continually Minimise IR35 Risk

24th January 2010

We can assist in this process, by reviewing your current contractual terms and working practices, to assess “IR35 tax risk” and then suggest improvements.

HMRC provide an online tool to assess your employment status:

The following badges of trade are some of the factors HM Revenue & Customs would use in assessing whether income from a particular contract is subject to the IR35 tax rules:

Badges of Trade

 

 

Indicative of Self-Employment

 (Contract for Service)

(ie: IR35 does not apply)

Indicative of Employment

(Contract of Service)

(ie: IR35 does apply)

 Control
You have the right to decide how, when and where a job is done.

Leading test cases: ECR Consulting Ltd, Castle Construction (Chesterfield) Ltd, Ready Mixed Concrete.

Close directional supervision by your client (master – servant relationship). Staff rules and regulations. Client can dismiss you.

Leading test cases: Autoclenz Ltd, Andrews, Stagecraft Ltd.

Personal Services
You have the substitution or delegation right to decide by whom a job is done (ie it is not a personal service).

Leading test cases: ECR Consulting Ltd, Community Dental Centres Ltd, MBF Design Services Ltd, Express and Echo Publications Ltd.

Single named worker only, or non matching contracts either side of agency, providing a personal service

Leading test case: Dragonfly Consultancy Ltd.

Basis of remuneration
Remunerated on a project basis, or at a fixed price. Remunerated on a time basis.
Provision of equipment
 You supply large or expensive equipment, and may work from a dedicated area of your own premises. Provision of only small or no equipment. Work at client’s premises.

Leading test case: Hall v Lorimer

Trading structure
Trade with more than one client at a time, or work on short successive assignments with different clients.

Leading test case: MBF Design Services Ltd, Market Investigations Ltd.

Long term assignments with the
same client. Working for previous employer, within the public sector or as an officer of the client.
Financial risk
A loss can be suffered. All rejected work to be corrected at your own cost. Penalty clauses. The opportunity exists to make a larger profit from sound management.

Leading test case: J and C Windows.

No financial exposure. All rejected work to be corrected at your client’s cost.
Business organisation
Own premises, letterheads, domain, website, training, other employees, insurance etc. Quoting for jobs in advance. Advertising None.
Terms of engagement
Contracts and actual working practices which are consistent with beneficial badges of trade. If engaged through an agency, then both contracts must match. Contracts which do not record the above beneficial badges of trade, no contracts at all, or actual work practises which differ from those recorded (sham).

Leading test case: Autoclenz Ltd.

Employee rights
 None. Typical employee benefits and statutory protection (eg paid holidays, sick pay, etc).
Part and parcel of the organisation
Appear and behave differently to employees. Re: staff parties, training days, e-mail address, canteen, parking space, etc.

Leading test cases: Novasoft Ltd,.

Appear and behave the same as employees.

Leading test cases: Dragonfly Consultancy Ltd, Future Online Ltd.

Mutuality of obligations and intentions
No obligation to offer and accept work over a period of time.

Leading test cases: ECR Consulting Ltd, Larkstar Data Ltd.

Mutual committment to offer and accept work over a period of time.

Leading test cases: Airfix Footwear Ltd, Synaptek Ltd.

The overall picture of employment status, and hence your IR35 status, would ultimately be determined by a court of law based on the “balance of probabilities” test; and not based on the “beyond reasonable doubt” test which is the yardstick by which most Tax Inspectors wrongly arrive at an opinion. In deciding IR35 status, a tribunal would arrive at a decision after having ‘painted a picture from the accumulation of detail’. If the detail gives a balanced picture, then the mutual intention of both parties will be the deciding factor.  This is why the detail is important and this is an area where we can offer guidance.



 
Other items in Blogs
 
Bethan Hassey
18th January 2018 Guide to filing confirmation statements

  A confirmation statement (CS01) must be filed by a company every year to confirm the information held about them at Companies House. Even if the details on the CS01 haven’t changed since last year’s statement, you must still submit one. This is usually within 14 days of the anniversary of incorporation of the company…

Read More »

Lisa Searle
8th January 2018 National Minimum Wage Rates

  Effective from April 2018 the National Minimum Wage rates will be increasing again, as per the below figures: Workers aged 25 years or more: £7.83 per hour Workers aged 21 to 24 years: £7.38 per hour Workers aged 18 to 20 years: £5.90 per hour Workers aged under 18 (but above compulsory school age):…

Read More »

Julie Quayle
8th January 2018 HMRC – Appeals

  HMRC has updated the postal address for where to send grounds for appeal if you have not paid your PAYE and National Insurance contributions on time. The address that should now be used is: DM PAYE Late Payment Penalties HM Revenue  and Customs BX9 1EW HMRC will charge penalties if more than one of…

Read More »

Jaimie Lane
4th January 2018 Charity annual returns due

  Charities with the financial year end of 31 March 2017 must submit their annual return by 31 January 2018, 10 months after the year end. What you need to submit varies based on whether it is an un-incorporated organisation or a charitable company. It also varies based on income of the charity – requiring…

Read More »

Richard Alecock
4th January 2018 Directors’ responsibilities

  Limited company directors and secretaries are collectively referred to as ‘officers’. Directors are appointed by members (shareholders and guarantors) to run and manage the day-to-day operations of the business. Secretaries are optional for private companies, but not public companies. They are usually appointed to assist directors with important administrative tasks. An Overview Company directors…

Read More »

Andrew Band
4th January 2018 EU competition infringements by European truck manufacturers

  The European Commission imposed fines of €3.4 billion in July 2016 and September 2017 following findings that a number of manufacturers were party to a cartel at senior management level from 1997-2001. Breakdowns of the fines for the companies involved were as follows: Daimler/Mercedes – €1 billion Scania – €880 million DAF – €752…

Read More »