back to article UK.gov gears up for IR35 private sector crackdown – say industry folk

The UK government is gearing up for a massive tax clampdown on private sector contractors, in an extension of its IR35 regime to hundreds of thousands of freelancers outside the public sector. This according to multiple contractor recruitment heads, with one claiming those plans have already started and will be introduced next …

Silver badge

Re: Already happening

It seems to me that "worker" is an attempt to a) give rights to self employed people working for companies in the same way as employees or b) muddy the water between employee and self employed depending on your viewpoint.

But in the case itself Mr. Smith was self-employed, not running a one-man company, at least according to this.

Maybe the government thinks this 'worker' definition can be used against employees of one-man companies (contractors)?

Pimlico Plumbers and Mr Smith – latest judgment: self employed contractor entitled to holiday leave

(gcache because the website is currently down)

Employee - where a contract of employment exists. This gives the full range of employment rights including protection from unfair dismissal, right to a redundancy payment, annual leave and pay, sick pay.

Worker - where a contract for service to do work personally exists ( or an employment contract as above).This gives a more limited range of working rights, including to annual leave and pay; to be paid at least the National Minimum Wage level and no unlawful deductions from wages.

Self employed - where neither of the above types of contract exists. This attracts a very limited range of working rights eg health and safety, working time and (with qualifications) discrimination protections.

It can be difficult to determine which category (and therefore which set of working rights ) applies to individuals apparently contracted with businesses as self employed contractors and who are self employed for tax purposes.

1
0
Silver badge

Re: Already happening

12 months ago any case from contractors before an Employment Tribunal failed. Now it seems every case is being won.

It would seem to me that there has been a big shift in policy and I have to wonder if this is a handed down policy from Central Government

That's not how the legal system works.

0
0
Silver badge

"Hopefully the government will have learnt its lesson.."

Given the amount of disastrous failures that have followed one another for almost the same reasons since years, my guess is : no.

11
0

This post has been deleted by its author

Silver badge
Boffin

The UK Tax system is no longer fit for purpose. It needs wholesale replacement to handle the changes in the world of employment opportunities and earning potential.

Permanent, Contract, Gig, Zero hours, etc. All are valid and none of them fit fairly in the current system. Stop wrapping the gerbil in Duct Tape, its done.

One simple income tax on all personal earnings no matter the source, then everyone pays on a level scale.

9
1
Silver badge
Coffee/keyboard

Blech!!

"Stop wrapping the gerbil in Duct Tape, its done."

Mind bleach please.

1
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: The UK Tax system is no longer fit for purpose.

Completely agree.

The politicos love to fiddle with the tax system, either to conceal the fact that they're raising taxes, or with the more laudable aim of trying to steer economic behaviour. The result over years is a comically convoluted tax code. It's well past time to ask whether the benefit, in terms of steering the economy, is worth the cost, in terms of collection/enforcement effort and accountants' fees.

For starters we could get rid of NI and roll it into income tax. And tax dividends the same as other income. At a stroke that would end this IR35 debate.

What about VAT? How much money is spent by companies on dealing with VAT, and by the revenue on collection and tackling VAT fraud? Get rid of it. Tax income instead.

Inheritance tax? Treat inheritances as income and forget about taxing the estate itself.

You could debate whether "sin taxes" should be retained - booze, fags, fuel duty and so on. They're relatively cheap to administer and collect, so does the social policy benefit justify that cost? Quite possibly, yes. But that should be the question we're asking about every tax or allowance or exemption.

6
2
Silver badge

Re: The UK Tax system is no longer fit for purpose.

This has been mooted a few times now and the tax systems of various other countries have been held up as examples. In essence, the consensus was that a simple tax allowance and a flat rate of tax benefited the lower paid 90% and actually brought in enough from the top 10% who currently pay lawyers to avoid tax (remember children avoid is legal, evade is not) that the Revenue would get the same into their coffers and a tax return would be 2 minutes work.

The main casualties in that would be tax lawyers who would have to get a real job and amazingly this seems to be a major stumbling block, how odd.

5
1
EBG

Re: The UK Tax system is no longer fit for purpose.

VAT is of course, an EU mandated tax. First luanched inthe run-in to the UK's accession.

2
2
Silver badge

Re: The UK Tax system is no longer fit for purpose.

"VAT is of course, an EU mandated tax."

It's also an audit trail.

2
0
Silver badge

Re: The UK Tax system is no longer fit for purpose.

Except that a flat rate income tax is entirely regressive. We don't do that in this country, and (AFAIK) neither do any other developed countries. (Singapore, maybe?)

0
2
Silver badge

Re: The UK Tax system is no longer fit for purpose.

Why do you say it is regressive unless of course you are confusing flat rate (% of income) with flat sum (specific value regardless of income)?

The studies indicated that the rate would be lower than at present but the removal of loopholes means that the higher earners actually pay more than at present. Since they would be paying the same percentage as the lower earners that makes it fair on everyone.

Our current system is actually regressive as the people at the top pay less as a percentage than those at the bottom through helpful tax lawyers working the system. I don't care that Lord Soap pays a million in tax as it is almost certainly less than 20% of his income. The numbers they pay sound big but it is a lower actual rate than Joe Soap the road sweeper.

2
1
Anonymous Coward

Re: The UK Tax system is no longer fit for purpose.

I don't think there's a strong argument for flat-rate tax. It's also politically difficult in a real democracy. It always favours the highest earners, so you'd only expect to see where there's an effective oligarchy.

A full flat rate is certainly very simple, all income can be taxed immediately at source, but it hurts everyone bar the high earners, and the poorer you are, the more it hurts. If you go for a flat rate plus a tax free allowance, then you can set that to benefit the lowest earners, but then the middle classes bear the brunt, and having 2 tiered bands is not really any simpler than our current 4.

What I would like to see is a big increase in the tax-free allowance, like double the current £11k. That would take a lot of low earners out of tax entirely, and even better, would enable the abolition of the complex and costly system of working tax credits. That does mean those with middle incomes need to pay more to take up the slack, but at least you can use tiered rates to ensure the top earners take their share of the increase too.

0
0

Re: The UK Tax system is no longer fit for purpose.

Flat rate tax system, try a couple of the Baltic states and Russia for starters. By regressive do you mean penalising people who work harder and consequently earner a little bit more? I have a bad back from carrying useless permies!

0
1
Silver badge

"One simple income tax on all personal earnings no matter the source, then everyone pays on a level scale."

Its not that simple. If I have the same tax rate as a permie Ill be taxed twice as for liability reasons I have to operate through a limited company which if we all had the same income tax applied would mean I'd be taxed twice.

What I think you are missing out is that we DO have the same tax rates applied at the moment, anything I take from my company as salary is taxed at the same rate as the salary that you have.. what is different is that I can take some income in the form of dividends which are taxed at a lower rate, thing is once you take into account the expenses of running a limited company the rates average out fairly evenly.

Yes its still in the contractors favour or no one would do it - I suggest that if you think its so awesome and easy that you give it a try - I can give you the number of a reasonably priced accountant and recruiter... fancy it?

0
0
Anonymous Coward

I've little sympathy for freelancers - in all my years in IT I've never met a single poor contractor. Frankly we all know exactly how many of them are paying themselves minimum wage and doing everything they can to minimise their tax bill. It's not cricket, lads.

However this is lipstick on a pig. Freelance, umbrella, "self employed", zero hours, they're all equally screwed. Government needs to dial back the attack on the individuals doing the work and focus on updating the income tax and NICs regimes to better reflect the modern world.

5
14
Anonymous Coward

"Government needs to dial back the attack on the individuals doing the work and focus on updating the income tax and NICs regimes to better reflect the modern world."

Absolutely - governments should stop the attack on individuals who do the work and focus on updating the income tax, NIC and pension regimes to reflect the modern world - and view those as a package: final salary pensions for some groups of public sector workers have a value that is not available to other employees either (most of whom are on defined contribution schemes), and should be factored in, as should the value of holiday pay, sick pay, training, and all/any other benefits. When you have some public sector employees who are on final salary pensions (with contributions not just matched but matched four times over) complaining about contractors being paid a lot, yet using contractor rates as an argument for their own pay rises because it's unfair contractors are paid more, something is wrong - that is a direct, "real world" example, by the way

Put the value of those benefits on top of base pay, and use that gross as the salary when making the total income calculations - then just set a tiered but simple tax system, no exemptions, no-one can claim expenses or receive benefits that others don't get unless it's calculated in, with no way to use dividends as income unless everyone can do it, and absolutely no scope for lawyers to game the system. Almost as important, do it as an all in one exercise - either they do all of it, or they stop tinkering with things as they are until they've come up with a coherent and simple system that is fair to all, balancing rates and rights, risks and rewards.

5
0
Anonymous Coward

"Put the value of those benefits on top of base pay, and use that gross as the salary when making the total income calculations..."

Er, no. The point is we *want* people to have good pensions and to have paid sick leave and to contribute into national insurance. That's kind of the underlying point of this. Contractors pay way, way less tax than anyone else doing equivalent work. They aren't spending the difference on sickness insurance or extra pension contributions or voluntary NICs, now, are they?

(FYI, next time you're on site, ask some of the civil servants how their final salary pension is doing. I'd recommend having a swift exit route planned.)

2
6
Anonymous Coward

"...public sector employees who are on final salary pensions (with contributions not just matched but matched four times over)..."

Not many final salary pension schemes still around. Even the platinum-plated 'British Steel' one seems to have been killed off.

2
0
Silver badge

@ 2nd AC

"Contractors pay way, way less tax than anyone else doing equivalent work."

Get fucked you numpty, what do you know about it?

A permie doing my job would pay about £24k/year in tax. I pay over £30k/year (that's including the benefit of paying myself a basic salary to lower my NIC).

If I go permie, HMRC loses £6k+ a year in tax receipts - how does that calculate as an increase in any way, shape or form?

10
2
Anonymous Coward

Re: @ 2nd AC

"how does that calculate as an increase in any way, shape or form?"

Because the permie's pre-tax income is a fraction of the contractor's, even accounting for employer-borne costs.

1
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: @ 2nd AC

@AC

If you are so jealous - why don't you try your hand at being a contractor?

Now the water is getting warmer ... near boling temperature.

See how 'easy' it is?.

It isn't a rocket science to be a contractor, but requires certain degree of ability to tolerate risk, understanding that there might not be tomorrow, etc.

I used to be a permie, never looked with envy to the contractors.

Left a long term permanent gig and started a 'real' IT company.

Although the IR35 is irrelevant to me I still can't help but feel the government wants to big up Crapita and co at the expense of the small guy.

9
1
Silver badge

Re: @ 2nd AC

"It isn't a rocket science to be a contractor, but requires certain degree of ability to tolerate risk, understanding that there might not be tomorrow, etc."

That's why you get paid more than permanent staff. It doesn't give you an excuse to aggressively avoid/evade tax.

0
8
Anonymous Coward

Re: @ 2nd AC

"If you are so jealous - why don't you try your hand at being a contractor?"

Because I'm in the lucky position of earning more by working for a boutique consultancy instead. We provide vendor-equivalent services so we get to bill out at 2k per day rather than the 6-800 i used to get a few years back wringing HMRC for everything they were worth. Can't play in that world as a freelancer.

I mean, sure, it means I don't get to spend 9 months of the year on a cushy contract doing next to no work 9-5 for a client who doesn't know any better, but that gets boring after a couple of years anyway.

1
4

Re: @ 2nd AC

"Although the IR35 is irrelevant to me I still can't help but feel the government wants to big up Crapita and co at the expense of the small guy."

"Because I'm in the lucky position of earning more by working for a boutique consultancy instead. We provide vendor-equivalent services so we get to bill out at 2k per day rather than the 6-800 i used to get"

This, to me, is exactly where IR35 breaks down. I believe contractors operating through a Ltd have a fairly easy time on the tax front (though one can argue the balance of risk vs reward), but why should a single contractor pay more tax than a 'boutique' or large or whatever consultancy doing the exact same thing they are! It will cost the end-client more to bring in a 'consultancy', and HMRC will probably end up with less tax at the end of it. Having worked with both consultancy firms and individual contractors, they are usually treated the same, with the client having a big say in how they operate. So the contractor may be considered in IR35, but the consultancy wouldn't be.

Perhaps one of the answers will be for contractors to frankenstein themselves together into small bogus consultancies. But why should they have to do that? Surely there has to be some tax middle ground...

2
0
Silver badge
WTF?

wtf?

"how does that calculate as an increase in any way, shape or form?"

"Because the permie's pre-tax income is a fraction of the contractor's, even accounting for employer-borne costs."

You're going to have to run that one past me again mate, because your response doesn't make sense.

I'm saying that if I'm 'encouraged' to go permie, then HMRC loses out to the tune of over £6k/year, and you say that's an increase to HMRC because the permie job pays less?

You're an idiot.

8
3
Anonymous Coward

Re: @ 2nd AC

"Because the permie's pre-tax income is a fraction of the contractor's, even accounting for employer-borne costs."

"Employer-borne costs" are far more than salary plus employer's NIC.

Think infrastructure to support the employees and long term liabilities.

A reasonable rule of thumb is to use a figure of twice the employee's salary.

Now do your sums again.

1
0

Fighting the temptation to go all "Ad hominem" ...

... hard, but must be done!

I scarcely think we would expect to find an economically "poor" fella* in the IT sector. That said, it is fair to argue that a successful contract resource is likely to have a few more pennies to toss about than a middle-of-the-road permie ... in most cases.

All this notwithstanding, I detect a sniff of your basic green-eyed monster in your comments (first para.). Please be advised that we are ALL entitled to pay the very least in tax as allowed by the law. It is not yet illegal to correctly apply tax laws so as to minimise your tax burden. Yes, it is quite true that there is greater scope for the self-employed than for the formally employed ... along with the risks, no vacation pay, no sick leave - need I go on? A moment's thought would raise many of the reasons why this has been so. You are as capable as any to work some of these out ...

Many other commentators have listed the risk factor in self-employment ... it is all very real. Very good contractors DO make a (relative) fortune .. and rightly so. So-so ones make a fair amount, and the crap ones, well, they go under sooner or later (or ... eek! ... go perm to escape the long droughts between gigs).

All I'd suggest is that until you have had the courage to go it alone, pack the green guy back in his or her box, and stop comparing apples with gherkins.

Until HMRC (or whatever tax entities apply to readers in diff'rnt locations) pull their jealous heads out of their bottoms and treat individual contractors as similarly as possible to the Capitas and their ilk out there, this will remain a silly argument between permies and contractors (and wilfully ignorant legislators).

Argh.

* in fairness, on a perm salary of 60K in London, I defy anyone to not see themselves as relatively poor. In saying that, the reality for many on contracts is that they are little better off financially than the poor sod on 60K if trying to hack it in the Big Smoke.

8
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: wtf?

Cost of permie = Salary + Employer contributions (NI, Pension) + Cover costs (Holiday, sickness)

Cost of freelance = Invoice

Normally those two numbers are roughly equivalent. If they are roughly equivalent, the taxman should be getting an equivalent cut.

PS: Reading some of these comments you would think that every company is heaving with freelancers. I think I've worked with 1 in 14 years working in City of London. Some companies just don't hire freelancers, some do. If you are a freelancer, you will be mainly working with the companies that do.

1
1
FAIL

Re: @ 2nd AC

@DavCrav

There is a very significant difference between evasion/avoidance.

Since using so loosely the terms you sound like not knowing the difference.

It is US site, however it stands true everywhere English is the official language:

https://www.thebalance.com/tax-avoidance-vs-evasion-397671

Evasion is what Al Capone got jailed for, avoidance is choosing to do careful tax planning.

HMRC choose to interpret the law as it suits them, often retrospectively.

If they apply the law to 100% of all tax payers, large international corporations and the like, then it is fair game.

However it is easy to squeeze Joe/Joanna Average until (s)he pops and give the lawyered-up Evil Big Corp a miss.

You never know, one day the big HMRC honchos might even work for Evil Big Corp, so don't bite the hand ...

4
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: wtf?

"I'm saying that if I'm 'encouraged' to go permie, then HMRC loses out to the tune of over £6k/year, and you say that's an increase to HMRC because the permie job pays less?"

Hmm,so there are 2 options.

1) Stay as a freelancer and pay, say, 30k tax

2) Go permie and pay, say, 24k Tax

But you are forgetting option 3 which is what the government are seeking

3) Stay as a freelancer and pay, say, 45k tax or the equivalent ot the amount of tax a permie earning the same amount of taxable income. The freelancer still earns more overall and this covers them for holidays, sickness etc.

This is the thinking, however much it may not be appreciated, by the govmint.

BTW, I'm not saying that freelancers aren't paying their right share of tax, but just using an argument of I pay more tax overall than someone else therefore I shouldn't pay any more, doesn't wash it. Otherwise everyone regardless of wealth or income would just look to pay a fix tax amount per year, hardly progressive, is it?

2
2
Anonymous Coward

Re: wtf?

"I'm saying that if I'm 'encouraged' to go permie, then HMRC loses out to the tune of over £6k/year, and you say that's an increase to HMRC because the permie job pays less?"

No, that's what you're saying. You're not being encouraged to go permie. You (and I mean the collective "you" of the world of freelance contractors) are being encouraged to not structure your compensation as if you're not a typical employee when you're otherwise very much a typical employee.

The same laws that guarantee Uber drivers and Deliveroo's bike slaves basic employment protections are the same laws that mean someone spending huge portions of their working time doing regular 9-5 work as an integrated part of a team, reporting into a corporate structure and with little or no say over what they're actually doing each day must be compensated as if they're an employee.

Now, I know freelancers get touchy about this (having been one, having worked with many), and they'll trot out all the usual lines about "more risk" and "no sick pay" and "we pay more net tax" but that is _not_ the point. The fact is a huge number of freelance contractors, particularly in IT, behave as direct employees in every respect except in the way they're compensated. It's the last sector where this is routine practise, and it is _solely_ done to lower tax bills.

If you are using your personal limited company (and remember, you are _not_ self employed) solely to limit liability and as a vehicle for your various professional indemnities then more power to you. However I know, you know and we all know that you can get those same protections and freedoms as a freelancer through an agency or through an umbrella. Why don't IT contractors use those mechanisms? Because owning your own employer means you get to dodge NICs.

You don't get to be righteous about this. You get to be angry, certainly, because you're staring down the barrel of a 20% pay cut, but let's not try and pretend this is the government coming for the poor, downtrodden working man when he's taking £700 a day plus expenses, paying himself £12k a year and banking the rest in dividends. If they don't get you with IR35 they'll get you with the employment regs. No sick pay or paid holidays for your full time employee, you say? Well Mr Company Director, step this way.

1
4
Silver badge

Re: wtf?

Ok, I get that HMRC will get additional revenue from employer contributions for a permie, they might even add up to the difference in tax receipts from the freelancer, but what about all that lovely VAT we collect for the government?

If I were on £400/day (5 days a week, 48 weeks in the year) then the government gets a tidy little sum of over £16k/year in VAT receipts. That would all go if I went permie. It's a lose-lose situation.

2
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: wtf?

If you go permie direct the exchequer's expenditure drops drastically (technical civil servants top out c. 50k). If you go permie for a supplier the vat still get paid.

1
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: wtf?

"...the government gets a tidy little sum of over £16k/year in VAT receipts. That would all go if I went permie. It's a lose-lose situation."

What? You only work for non-VAT registered companies who can't claim the VAT back? How on earth can they afford £400 a day?

0
1
Thumb Down

I've little sympathy for permies

I've met so many that get paid a fairly reasonable wage for just turning up and sitting at a desk.

As a contractor, more often than not brought in to do they work they either should have done, or have loused up so badly it needs redoing, I'm paid only because the work gets done.

"It's not cricket, lads."

Ask yourself this, if it's such an easy life, what's stopping you becoming an over-paid contractor yourself?

6
0
Silver badge

Re: I've little sympathy for permies

As a contractor, more often than not brought in to do they work they either should have done, or have loused up so badly it needs redoing, I'm paid only because the work gets done.

You know the opposite is also true right? We had a contractor come in to work on an Alfresco deployment for us, as we had no-one with Java experience. He produced virtually nothing in 3 months, at which point he was ditched and we head hunted someone who could actually do it as a permie.

1
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: I've little sympathy for permies

"He produced virtually nothing in 3 months, at which point he was ditched and we head hunted someone who could actually do it as a permie."

We've had a very similar scenario. Contractors I've used generally have no care for the company and the motivation for success and so the work is done to the minimum they can get away with.

Permanent staff have a real motivation to to the best job and see their projects flourish and grow. As they'll be looking after them they make sure the coding is good, well documented and far fewer 'fudges' than the contractor work.

0
1

And why have Final Salary and other Private Sector pensions gone down the pan? Because greedy companies, bosses and shareholders did everything they could to avoid paying into them when times were good. Cries of the pension funds have huge surpluses so the company (not the employees mind) stopped paying in. This despite that fact that even the most dull witted could see that the pension liabilities were going to increase as the population aged. This was totally predictable and facilitated by Bliar/Brown. The real beneficiaries of the deceit are long gone with their piles of shareholder dividends stolen from the ordinary workers.They then made the situation even worse by raiding all the pension schemes as an easy source of tax to through on the fire. No the more recent governments have made any efforts to reverse that insane tax.

1
1
Silver badge

Re: @ 2nd AC

"There is a very significant difference between evasion/avoidance [sic].

Since using so loosely the terms [sic] you sound like not knowing [sic] the difference."

Actually, you sound like you don't know the difference between tax avoidance and aggressive tax avoidance, which is an offence in the UK, just as evasion is.

Pro tip: when trying to correct someone, make sure you are right.

0
1
Anonymous Coward

silly suggestion

Let's make all MPs and their private offices into small companies, subject to all of the same rules as contractors. Pay them a reasonable daily rate for days they work, and make them subject to their employers' (constituents) view on how they perform, with a month by month review, and subject to immediate termination if external factors change? And if they breach the terms of their contract (the manifesto on which they were elected), then they're out. There's a news story today about them employing relatives in their private office - this gets rid of that problem too, they are free to do so if those people are the right person for the job, and all of those costs (and all of the cost of their offices, their travel, housing etc) would all be covered by exactly the same rules as limited company contractors.

Alternatively, make them all permanent employees - with one "normal" place of work either in constituency or in Parliament, no expenses while they are there or to travel there, but they can claim cheapest travel option to the other with an overnight allowance of £30 plus accommodation either from their own pocket or at a budget hotel within reasonable distance. No private office (normal employees don't have one) but a shared resource pool, no second home as an expense, no bonus at the end of a contract, and certainly no final salary pension.

After all, if contractors get the same benefits as others (which we don't) and should pay the same tax, or alternatively if the employee tax system is entirely fair and reasonable, then MPs couldn't possibly be so hypocritical as to give themselves benefits others dont get, and at the same time oversee a clampdown on others, could they?

15
0

Tax isn't taxing

Make me pay more tax and I will just up my rates. Someone will pay.

8
1
Anonymous Coward

Re: Tax isn't taxing

To be fair this is absolutely fine. I don't think anyone would have a problem with contractors marketing themselves 20-30% higher to account for paying 25-30% tax instead of 10-15%. This just means companies are paying the genuine market-defined rate rather than being effectively subsidised by the government.

1
1
Anonymous Coward

Re: Tax isn't taxing

Why don't you just up your rates anyway? If you don't need the extra money then give it to charity or is it that you feel a moral duty to keep your rates low to protect the struggling organisations you work for?

0
3
Anonymous Coward

Govt just trying to get cash back for shite work done by contractors.

Crap systems, cost over runs & delays, but contractors keep getting paid over the odds and then avoid paying their share of tax/ni despite the well reported shite they produce for the Govt.

0
10

Re: Govt just trying to get cash back for shite work done by contractors.

Sounds like a whinging permie that didn't have the balls to go contract to me.

I pay my share of Tax and NI that I am due to pay according to the current rules set by HMRC. If the rules change, then I will pay a different amount.

If my 30 years in the industry and 21 years as a contractor have taught me anything, it is that the more a permie moans about contractors not paying their fair share, the more times they have got less of a raise than they think they deserved.

12
1
Silver badge

Re: Govt just trying to get cash back for shite work done by contractors.

You are confusing contractors (individual people) with outsourcing companies (E.g. Capita, Accenture) and are forgetting that those same large outsourcing companies are the only ones benefitting from this.

The mass exodus of contractors from public sector projects will be picked up by these same companies as they will be the only people willing to do it, and they will provide less qualified people being paid less than the original contractors but will charge more.

11
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Govt just trying to get cash back for shite work done by contractors.

Public sector contractors are already invariably contracted by crapita or someone equivalent anyway. Just being your own limited company is not enough assurance for government departments. Capita win whatever happens. More contractors? More 10% cuts for them. More outsourcing? Well look who just happens to have 100 skilled and experienced recently unemployed contractors to hand.

0
0

Re: Govt just trying to get cash back for shite work done by contractors.

There is a need for an investigation into the donation given to the blue socialists party and its individual MPs.

0
1
Anonymous Coward

Contractors band together

It seems to me the fundamental government policy is this:

* Large consulting companies (e.g. Crapita, Accenture) = good

* Individual consultants working for themselves = bad

So, could the answer be for consultants to work together? How many would you need? Would just two count as a genuine consulting business, and if not, what's the threshold?

It would certainly cause complications dividing the profits in relation to hours worked, but accountancy and legal firms with "partners" seem to be able to handle this.

Mind you, that's because the partners are happy to share the profits generated by all the smaller workers. Much like Crapita and Accenture in fact.

So in the end, maybe what the government really wants you to do is:

* Set up your consulting business

* Take in work

* Farm it off to sweatshops in India

* Cream off the profits

Result!

9
0

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018