header-logo header-logo

13 March 2020
Categories: Legal News , Tax
printer mail-detail

IR35 attracts lawyers’ ire

Lawyers have slated the decision by the Chancellor to press ahead with IR35 implementation in April
Lawyers have slated the decision by the Chancellor to press ahead with IR35 implementation in April.

The Treasury confirmed in this week’s Budget that it will legislate to implement the changes to the off-payroll working rules (IR35) from 6 April 2020. The rule change aims to catch out contractors who set up limited companies to minimise tax exposure while working in similar conditions to that of an employee.

DWF corporate tax partner Caroline Colliston said the implementation would ‘occur against a backdrop of concerns… about the impact on business, the labour supply chain and the confusion and lack of clarity around the terms and operation of the legislation’.

She suggested employers ‘take quick action’ to ensure compliance, including ‘identifying their contingent workforce, ensuring the burden of operating PAYE is shifted down their contractual labour supply chain, reviewing the terms of contracts in their labour supply chain, adopting robust internal procedures and audits to ensure status determination statements are provided and liability is limited as well as considering establishing an employment status disagreement process’.

Seb Maley, CEO of IR35 compliance specialist Qdos, called the move to continue with the 6 April start date for IR35 a ‘needless, short-sighted tax grab’.

Miles Dean, head of international tax at Andersen Tax UK, said: ‘Contractors are an easy target. The sector has been rife with tax avoidance for many years and this, unfortunately, is the result. Are large corporates, who may have well over 1000 contractors at a time, really supposed to undertake an individual review of each one's affairs and then certify whether or not they’re employees or consultants?

‘Putting the burden of determining status on the third party company is onerous, impractical and unfair to say the least, irrespective of the current coronavirus outbreak. The fact that businesses are at risk from both HMRC and the contractor if it wrongly determines the status of an individual is a very unfortunate feature of the legislation.

‘A form of self-certification from the contractor would be much more equitable, particularly in circumstances where the determination between employee and self-employed is borderline. Which it very often is.’

Categories: Legal News , Tax
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Projects and rail practices strengthened by director hire in London

DWF—Stephen Hickling

DWF—Stephen Hickling

Real estate team in Birmingham welcomes back returning partner

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Firm invests in national growth with 44 appointments across five offices

NEWS
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 transformed criminal justice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ed Cape of UWE and Matthew Hardcastle and Sandra Paul of Kingsley Napley trace its ‘seismic impact’
Operational resilience is no longer optional. Writing in NLJ this week, Emma Radmore and Michael Lewis of Womble Bond Dickinson explain how UK regulators expect firms to identify ‘important business services’ that could cause ‘intolerable levels of harm’ if disrupted
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
back-to-top-scroll