The issues with IR35
Despite its bad press, the IR35 rules were originally put in place to stop a very real tax avoidance problem and not to target hard-working contractors as many claim today.
Back in 1999, the UK was suffering from a very real tax avoidance problem called ‘false self-employment. This was where self-employed workers were really employees (in all but name), but were made to go self-employed so that both the employer and former employee could pay less tax. This not only gave a tax advantage to those doing the employing (by wiping out employers national insurance), but also those who are employed (by lowering their income tax). As you can imagine, this had some pretty damaging effects on tax revenues.
However, in recent times IR35 as evolved from a legitimate attack on tax avoidance to a controversial attack on the tax benefits enjoyed by those workers taking a risk and starting out on their own.
Many would argue that IR35 is no longer about saving the government money but in fact about making the government money.
What is CEST, and what can it mean for you as a contractor?
Prior to 2017, IR35 based its decision on the contents of written contracts. But from April 2017, for the public sector alone, deciding whether a contractor was inside or outside of IR35 shifted to focus on the reality of the job role, adding emphasis on the client when it comes to compliance.
As a result of government pressure on its own departments, en-mass huge swathes of public sector contractors were considered to be inside IR35.
Of course this decision was controversial, and as such HMRC addressed the choice from the start with the launch of it’s own guidance as to IR35.
To simplify things HMRC made its CEST tool available to contractors and agencies, to allow them to check their employment status. However, from the outset CEST has been heavily criticised. Most complaints focus on the inflexible nature of the tool, failing to take into account a contractors circumstances when making a decision.
HMRC have previously said that they would stand by the results of CEST in tax hearings. But now, that might not be the case. In fact in the recent RALC Consulting Ltd vs HMRC tribunal case, HMRC argued that the results of CEST were in fact incorrect, and despite CEST deciding that the contractor was outside of IR35, the contractor was indeed caught.
Because of this, it’s advised that you review your situation yourself in addition to taking the test. But for you to do that, you’ve got to understand what CEST is.
The tool itself looks at the following three things when evaluating your working practices:
Control
How much control does your client have over when and how you do your work? How about what specific work you do? A contractor should be completely free to work as they choose. But if this isn’t the case and your client is requiring you to work in a team, manage (or be managed), book in holidays or wear a uniform, then you’re most likely going to be considered as violating IR35.
Substitution
Can you send anyone to fulfil your contact? Unlike employees, contractors are able to send anyone who’s qualified to do the role if you’re unable.
Mutuality of Obligation
If there’s no work to do, then as a contractor your client is under no obligation to source more work for you. If you’re an employee this is not the case as they must find you work, and you must accept it.