Tories to scrap IR35?

[Malvolio]

Originally Posted by Bel

Just one other thing... what is the PCG's official stance on repealing IR35? Are they proposing a third-way tax alternative or are they recommending and discussing your approach with relevant influential parties - that it should only apply to ex-employees of hiring organisations?

It would be helpful to know.

PCG stands for the total repeal of IR35. We always have, we always will.

We also believe the status of "Freelancer" needs to be accepted as a valid third way of working, mainly because the market in the UK is utterly different to anywhere else in Europe. This causes issues with EU-wide legislation since everything is currently framed in terms of Employer and Employee, while the typical UK freelancer doesn't really fit either category: hence all the difficulties with the Agency Regs for example. The easy way to correct that would be to repeal S44-7 meaning we could work as sole traders again. That recognition has nothing to do with differential taxation regimes.

Incidentally you can always ask the PCG themselves, rather than rely on my opinions. Contact details on the website.

[Bel]

Originally Posted by Malvolio

PCG stands for the total repeal of IR35. We always have, we always will.

We also believe the status of "Freelancer" needs to be accepted as a valid third way of working, mainly because the market in the UK is utterly different to anywhere else in Europe. This causes issues with EU-wide legislation since everything is currently framed in terms of Employer and Employee, while the typical UK freelancer doesn't really fit either category: hence all the difficulties with the Agency Regs for example. The easy way to correct that would be to repeal S44-7 meaning we could work as sole traders again. That recognition has nothing to do with differential taxation regimes.

Incidentally you can always ask the PCG themselves, rather than rely on my opinions. Contact details on the website.

I wasn't asking for your opinion, I was asking about the PCG's official stance on the issue.

How can you (the PCG) possibly say that there is a third-way of working, whilst stating that you (PCG) are in favour of IR35 repeal? Why do you say that one-man bands don't fit either an employer or employee? Of course they do, if they work through a limited company. They are employees - of their own company and employers of themselves. What else can they be? By saying otherwise, you are effectively siding with HMRC - that owner managers only use a limited co as a convenient payment vehicle not as a legitimate trading route and, therefore, different tax rules should apply to them.

I agree that sole trading does represent a viable third way of working, and a choice that should be open to all one-man bands, but I've never heard the PCG formally announce that as the only acceptable alternative they would consider. Have you? If so, I'd be interested to know, as would others on here, and I'm sure you would know above all others on here....as an ex-Director.

BTW, why are you now an ex? Was it down to policy differences, or did you get bored with it all, or were you too busy etc. Presumably, you seemed keen enough to take on this role last year.

[Malvolio]

I'm posting as me. My opinion is informed but it is only my opinion: if you want the official PCG line, ask the PCG. They will be happy to answer. They will however confirm that abolition of IR35 is their primary aim.

You insist on not reading what I'm saying. There can be a recognised third way, the independent Freelancer, who can work thorough any of a range of trading vehilces. Each of those - umbrella, limited company, sole trader, LLP, virtual consultancy, whatever - already has a set of legislation to control and tax it and most freelancers are more than happy to work with whichever format suits them best. However, IR35 seeks to take one specific combination, the owner-managed microbusiness trading through a Limited Company, and tax it and its owner(s) differently to all the other, legally identical Limited Companies using som e arbitrary set of rules that are not even clearly defined. Hence it is baltantly unfair and divisive law and should be scrapped. There is no conflict between the two statements.

We had a director resign last year mid-term. I got voted in as an appointee to fill the gap for the remainder of the term. Come the proper election in May there were new candidates. While I stood for re-election I never thought I would be there by now anyway, I've been around too long: time to let the new guys have a go.

[Pistachio]

Do you get a cape as a PCG director?

[Bel]

Originally Posted by Malvolio

I'm posting as me. My opinion is informed but it is only my opinion: if you want the official PCG line, ask the PCG. They will be happy to answer. They will however confirm that abolition of IR35 is their primary aim.

You insist on not reading what I'm saying. There can be a recognised third way, the independent Freelancer, who can work thorough any of a range of trading vehilces. Each of those - umbrella, limited company, sole trader, LLP, virtual consultancy, whatever - already has a set of legislation to control and tax it and most freelancers are more than happy to work with whichever format suits them best. However, IR35 seeks to take one specific combination, the owner-managed microbusiness trading through a Limited Company, and tax it and its owner(s) differently to all the other, legally identical Limited Companies using som e arbitrary set of rules that are not even clearly defined. Hence it is baltantly unfair and divisive law and should be scrapped. There is no conflict between the two statements.

We had a director resign last year mid-term. I got voted in as an appointee to fill the gap for the remainder of the term. Come the proper election in May there were new candidates. While I stood for re-election I never thought I would be there by now anyway, I've been around too long: time to let the new guys have a go.

There is a clear distinction between your two statements:

(a) you say that there is already a recognised third way of working - sole trading.

(b) you say that 'freelancers' are a separate category - no matter what trading vehicle they use - that cannot be classed as employers or employees. Therefore, really ought to have the choice of being 'self employed.' As sole traders, I agree. But you then go on to say that they should choose whichever trading vehicle they choose (and give examples). They can't if they work through a limited company - because limited company owners are not 'self employed' they are both employers and employees.

I don't know why you won't give readers the official stance from the PCG on this issue. Why not tell us here? Is it because they don't have any particular avenues to pursue over their preferred alternative to IR35?

Your position also seems to be strangely at odds with your eagerness to promote the PCG on here as an organisation well worth joining. That's like being a salesman and then refusing to show potential customers the goods - except insurance products - which you claim are not products that members buy, as such, but the PCG buys on behalf of members to protect it's members when necessary - to avoid being seen as commercial (a clever, but unconvincing play on words, I might add).

[Malvolio]

The answer is in the public domain and can be found on their main website, just here. I suggest you read it.

[Pistachio]

Originally Posted by Malvolio

The answer is in the public domain and can be found on their main website, just here. I suggest you read it.

That answer may be in the public domain, but it doesn't say whether PCG directors get a cape. Not even in the "about us" section.

[Bel]

I've just skim read it.

All I can see is this:

"Push for the abolition of IR35 and reform of
employment status, working with Opposition parties where appropriate."

This statement is buried about half way down the principles and values pdf document - under the sub-title 'We Must Influence and Effect Change.'

But this still doesn't answer the question I posed. A half-hearted commitment to repealing IR35 is one thing. But I can't see any clearly set out proposal of what they think it should be replaced with. That was my question, not whether they agree with IR35 repeal.

What made me smile was this statement:

"the vision of a perfect world serves as our guiding light."

They've got a heck of a long wait, haven't they? I always thought you (PCG) were realists, not idealists? Not sure how this sits comfortably with Tory values of industriousness, initiative and healthy competition and rewards that reflects an individual's willingness to take risks either. It sound more like a mantra chanted by our Socialist counterparts. I don't know that many socialists that agree with tax avoidance, do you?

I have to admit that I find the IR56 guidelines a lot easier to understand and apply to my engagements than the PCG's policy, values and mission statement.

[Malvolio]

Selective quotation is such a weak response.

It's a vision statement, take it as a whole, and that means reading it and the associated supporting material properly Yes it's a paradigm shift that won't happen tomorrow, but at least someone's trying to make it happen.

You want to be a writer, try doing proper research.

[Bel]

Originally Posted by Malvolio

Selective quotation is such a weak response.

It's a vision statement, take it as a whole, and that means reading it and the associated supporting material properly Yes it's a paradigm shift that won't happen tomorrow, but at least someone's trying to make it happen.

You want to be a writer, try doing proper research.

I think your response is weak, to be honest.

You directed me to read something, and I did. That's what it says and how's its presented. I just pointed it out.

What other research should I have done, that shouldn't have been obvious from the material you placed under my nose to consult?

You still haven't answered my question either. ... it's your 'selective avoidance' that we're dealing with here, not 'selective' quotations.

As for 'wanting to be a writer? I'm one already thanks. I don't think decending into insults really helps your case for credibility, do you?