subcontracting to the same company

[AardvarkTreeServices]

Please explain about self employed contract?

 

Contracts and reality need to reflect a self employed relationship so getting your contracts written correctly AND working to them is important.

[AardvarkTreeServices]

If you are an employer happily treating guys as subbies and you get a letter from the hmrc to pay back years of ni contributiona tax etc. Or you have a guy take you to an employment tribunal claiming unpaid holiday pay or even unfair dismissal. you might..

 

Exactly.

 

If you dont give a flying frog then thats fine so long as you maintain that approach when handing over all the tax and NI you should have collected as an employer.

[Rich Rule]

I know of tree firms who have had the investigations into this. 3 trucks of 3 man teams all "permanently Self Employed to the same firm".

 

The tax bill alone for one year would be enough to send under let alone investigations into how long the relationship between the guys and the company had been going on.

 

My missus was also in this situation. The company she had worked for for 7 years (rolling three month contract) 6-8 dancers and the HMRC investigated them. The company were required to pay the outstanding NI contributions for all the staff over the 7 year period.

[Paul Jenks]

Clearly there are a number of different business models used by folk on here. A 'sub-contractor' employed by a company who is not free to price a job, do it and then invoice the main contractor is not a sub-contractor. If they work under the direction of anyone from the main contractor, they are defacto an employee. Not only does this mean they are entitled to employee rights, the employer also has to make their own NI contributions to HMRC over and above the PAYE/NI tax contributions the sub-contractor/employee makes.

This is why HMRC doesn't like it. It's a tax dodge by employers.

I find it extraordinary how derogatory some folk are towards employees and sub-contractors alike. Anyone who thinks and feels and acts like they're going to get shafted will usually get shafted as every action and communication positions them to get shafted. Step away from the role of boss and/or employer and treat folk as fellow humans and you might be surprised how differently things turn out. When things do go sideways it's a learning experience. Blaming others is an excuse.

 

Back to the OP. Maybe you could discuss it with the main contractor as has been suggested so that neither is acting contrary to HMRC. Having posted, I'm guessing you're a little concerned, so go about it the legal way and be happier in your work without the worry.

[felixthelogchopper]

I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned the Z word yet.

[bolthole]

You can work for one company for as long as you want and be self employed!! What is important is the relationship you have with the company.

 

There are 3 tests for self employment which are control, substitution and mutuality of obligation!

 

You have to control how the work is done, not the company you work for. If you control how the work is done that is a strong indicator of self employment.

 

If you dont have to do the work yourself and can send someone else to do it then that is an absolute indicator of self employment.

 

If the company you are working for isnt obliged to offer you continuous work, or you are not obliged to accept any work offered, then that is another good indicator of self employment.

 

You can ignore the bull on the HMRC web site as that is there to get you into employment which brings in more tax and NI

 

A friend of mine works for Bank of America (in Chester!) - she says that they treat their subcontractors as 'bought-in services' as opposed to 'bought-in people'. They build in a 6 week sabbatical every year to be on the safe side. Sounds like the 'substituation' bit you mentioned - makes sense.

[Ian Flatters]

No mention of subbies in your original post so I only commented on what you'd written!!

 

 

Just clarifying what I'd written that's all.

[Hodge]

Clearly there are a number of different business models used by folk on here. A 'sub-contractor' employed by a company who is not free to price a job, do it and then invoice the main contractor is not a sub-contractor. If they work under the direction of anyone from the main contractor, they are defacto an employee. Not only does this mean they are entitled to employee rights, the employer also has to make their own NI contributions to HMRC over and above the PAYE/NI tax contributions the sub-contractor/employee makes.

This is why HMRC doesn't like it. It's a tax dodge by employers.

I find it extraordinary how derogatory some folk are towards employees and sub-contractors alike. Anyone who thinks and feels and acts like they're going to get shafted will usually get shafted as every action and communication positions them to get shafted. Step away from the role of boss and/or employer and treat folk as fellow humans and you might be surprised how differently things turn out. When things do go sideways it's a learning experience. Blaming others is an excuse.

 

Back to the OP. Maybe you could discuss it with the main contractor as has been suggested so that neither is acting contrary to HMRC. Having posted, I'm guessing you're a little concerned, so go about it the legal way and be happier in your work without the worry.

 

 

I've employed 2 people in the past all of which were treated as I would of liked to be treated by an employer, they expected everything and gave very little in return. I would not employ again, finding the right employee is hard but then you find them and they get the old green eye of jealousy, don't respect equipment, let you down etc.

[Mortimer Firewood]

I've employed 2 people in the past all of which were treated as I would of liked to be treated by an employer, they expected everything and gave very little in return. I would not employ again, finding the right employee is hard but then you find them and they get the old green eye of jealousy, don't respect equipment, let you down etc.

 

Same here.

[jonno141]

Thanks for the info boys