header-logo header-logo

Hammond’s IR35 tax foray

31 October 2018
Issue: 7815 / Categories: Legal News , Employment
printer mail-detail

Budget clampdown on personal service company consultants

Private sector businesses have been advised to think carefully about whether the Chancellor’s IR35 budget raid applies to them—in many cases, it may not.

Chancellor Philip Hammond’s budget this week extended to the private sector an existing tax on public sector organisations that hire consultants and self-employed people who would otherwise be an employee. Large and medium sized businesses with more than 250 employees will be obliged, from April 2020, to deduct tax from the pay of consultants who work through personal service companies.

The aim of the tax reform is to stop people avoiding tax by using the shield of a personal service company to hide their employment status.

However, James Medhurst, employment law solicitor at Fieldfisher, said: ‘Crucially, the changes only apply if the relationship with the consultant resembles an employment relationship.

‘Many businesses are naturally worried that, if they start to make these deductions too widely, many of their consultants will defect to their competitors and, therefore, this is a decision which should not be taken lightly. HMRC has recently lost several IR35 cases before the Tax Tribunal, and the changes are unlikely to affect anywhere near as many people as the government has predicted. When similar changes were introduced into the public sector, many public sector bodies took HMRC’s word for it that the legislation applies, but private sector businesses would be advised not to do the same.’

Chris Sanger, EY’s head of tax policy, said it was important that the government ‘address the problems that are present in the current scheme’ before April 2020 or there would be ‘a strong risk that the implementation will be problematic and potentially undermine the availability of the UK’s flexible workforce’.

HMRC will publish a consultation paper outlining the details of the reforms in the next few months.

Issue: 7815 / Categories: Legal News , Employment
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
In NLJ this week, Bea Rossetto of the National Pro Bono Centre marks Pro Bono Week by urging lawyers to recognise the emotional toll of pro bono work
Can a lease legally last only days—or even hours? Professor Mark Pawlowski of the University of Greenwich explores the question in this week's NLJ
RFC Seraing v FIFA, in which the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) reaffirmed that awards by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) may be reviewed by EU courts on public-policy grounds, is under examination in this week's NLJ by Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law, Zurich
back-to-top-scroll