header-logo header-logo

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

Hammond’s IR35 tax foray

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll