HMRC Inside ir35 - tax evasion

HMRC Inside ir35 - tax evasion

Author
Discussion

Too Late

Original Poster:

5,136 posts

250 months

Saturday 17th May
quotequote all
My current role is outside IR35 and contracted through a consultancy. I am currently working on a project, but I’ve recently been informed that my role has now been deemed to be inside IR35.

The consultancy claims they’ve found a solution to address the inside IR35 determination.

I’ve been told I’ll be issued two contracts: one inside IR35 and one outside. The inside IR35 contract will cover 39 hours per week and will pay a total of £108.20 for the month — supposedly to meet the minimum London living wage requirements.

The second, outside IR35 contract will cover the remaining payment, which will be the bulk of my contract. However, only 30 minutes to 1 hour per month will be allocated to delivering work for the consultancy.

To me, this arrangement feels ethically questionable and potentially constitutes tax evasion. While the consultancy has stated they’ve taken legal advice to support this approach, I have serious doubts about its legitimacy.

Any thoughts? If this were a valid solution, I suspect we’d see this kind of setup far more widely used.

worsy

6,191 posts

190 months

Saturday 17th May
quotequote all
Probably best in the jobs section, however I would be very surprised if that worked. if the determination is being done by the client I would suggestvthe risk is with them.

Too Late

Original Poster:

5,136 posts

250 months

Saturday 17th May
quotequote all
Thanks. Will post there. And that's my thoughts as well

ecs

1,367 posts

185 months

Saturday 17th May
quotequote all
There are quite a few umbrella companies who offer this - while it's "legal" HMRC strongly discourage against this. They can retrospectively recover unpaid taxes when they change the law/rules in future, see the 'loan charge' structure.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/working-through-an-umb...

Too Late

Original Poster:

5,136 posts

250 months

Saturday 17th May
quotequote all
The initial message was deleted from this topic on 17 May 2025 at 13:56

Wills2

26,106 posts

190 months

Saturday 17th May
quotequote all

Like all these schemes everybody is sure of its compliance until it's not complaint and then it's you that pays the bill.






Arnold Cunningham

4,265 posts

268 months

Saturday 17th May
quotequote all
Back in 2009 ish I was in a "scheme". Biggest professional regret ever.

The thing with these schemes is that they tell you they're declared to HMRC and it's all above board.
But when it all goes tits up, they disappear, usually to the caman islands.
I was also involved in our company when the IR35 rules changed and had a bunch of contractors working for me.

I'm a bit out of this arena now, but my no.1 piece of advice is that if it seems too good to be true, it almost certainly is. Keep your nose clean, it'll cost more than you save now to fix it later.

paddy1970

1,108 posts

124 months

Saturday 17th May
quotequote all
Your instinct is correct - this is highly problematic as HMRC examines "the actual nature of the work relationship, not only the contract," which means they look beyond paperwork to determine your true working arrangement.

The fact that it isn't commonly seen is telling. While the consultancy claims they've taken legal advice, I would be very skeptical about this approach.

Olivera

8,128 posts

254 months

Saturday 17th May
quotequote all
It sounds like contrived bks. And how can 39 hours per week at the living wage only amount to £108.20 for the month?

Countdown

44,408 posts

211 months

Saturday 17th May
quotequote all
Too Late said:
My current role is outside IR35 and contracted through a consultancy. I am currently working on a project, but I’ve recently been informed that my role has now been deemed to be inside IR35.

The consultancy claims they’ve found a solution to address the inside IR35 determination.

I’ve been told I’ll be issued two contracts: one inside IR35 and one outside. The inside IR35 contract will cover 39 hours per week and will pay a total of £108.20 for the month — supposedly to meet the minimum London living wage requirements.

The second, outside IR35 contract will cover the remaining payment, which will be the bulk of my contract. However, only 30 minutes to 1 hour per month will be allocated to delivering work for the consultancy.

To me, this arrangement feels ethically questionable and potentially constitutes tax evasion. While the consultancy has stated they’ve taken legal advice to support this approach, I have serious doubts about its legitimacy.

Any thoughts? If this were a valid solution, I suspect we’d see this kind of setup far more widely used.
The onus is on the Employer to ensure that the correct tax treatment is applied so i wouldn't worry about it too much.

Pincher

9,402 posts

232 months

Saturday 17th May
quotequote all
Ask the consultancy to indemnify you or commit to paying any fine levied resulting from any investigation by HMRC?

I’d suggest that their response might tell you (a) how confident they are in their position and (b) whether you want to continue working for them.

duffy78

477 posts

154 months

Friday 23rd May
quotequote all
If it looks like a duck.................................

Eric Mc

123,876 posts

280 months

Monday 26th May
quotequote all
duffy78 said:
If it looks like a duck.................................
Unfortunately, the legislation and case law around IR35 is now so messy trying to work out what a duck actually is has become very difficult.

Panamax

6,206 posts

49 months

Monday 26th May
quotequote all
"If a promoter says their scheme is legal or that they have legal opinion, it does not mean it works. A lawyer may have given an opinion on a scheme, but often it’s heavily dependent on a list of circumstances that may not be relevant to you. You cannot rely on an opinion given to somebody else. It’s also only one opinion and may not be correct.

"If you sign up to a scheme that does not work, you may end up with a higher tax bill than expected."

On this somewhat dated link there's a specific section about contractors and agency workers,
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/tax-avoidance-schemes-...

MustangGT

13,168 posts

295 months

Tuesday 27th May
quotequote all
Too Late said:
My current role is outside IR35 and contracted through a consultancy. I am currently working on a project, but I’ve recently been informed that my role has now been deemed to be inside IR35.

The consultancy claims they’ve found a solution to address the inside IR35 determination.

I’ve been told I’ll be issued two contracts: one inside IR35 and one outside. The inside IR35 contract will cover 39 hours per week and will pay a total of £108.20 for the month — supposedly to meet the minimum London living wage requirements.

The second, outside IR35 contract will cover the remaining payment, which will be the bulk of my contract. However, only 30 minutes to 1 hour per month will be allocated to delivering work for the consultancy.

To me, this arrangement feels ethically questionable and potentially constitutes tax evasion. While the consultancy has stated they’ve taken legal advice to support this approach, I have serious doubts about its legitimacy.

Any thoughts? If this were a valid solution, I suspect we’d see this kind of setup far more widely used.
First question, the 'inside' contract would be at minimum wage, or thereabouts, your post did not make sense on that point.

Secondly, the 'outside' contract would be for what exactly? If the inside contract covers your time, what could possibly be included in the outside contract?

Monkeylegend

27,718 posts

246 months

Tuesday 27th May
quotequote all
What you don't want to do is give HMRC any reason to carry out a detailed investigation into your tax affairs.

theboss

7,276 posts

234 months

Tuesday 27th May
quotequote all
Who determined the status of the original contract, the hiring org or you / your PSC?

Putting the new arrangement to one side, the big risk of an ongoing engagement switching from outside to inside is that HMRC come along and determine that it should have always been inside, and demand the backdated deductions plus penalties.

At risk of stating the obvious, if the new arrangement is also blatantly contrived to evade tax, the chance of that investigation happening go up exponentially, what you have described would be a red rag to a bull.

Edited by theboss on Tuesday 27th May 16:36

arfur

3,945 posts

229 months

Tuesday 27th May
quotequote all
There has been a lot of outside roles now being determined as inside over the past couple of years

If you are providing a service outside and you are now expected to deliver the role (note not a service) as inside then you have two options

1) Exit immediately - HMRC can go back a number of years and if the now inside can be applied to the previous outside - guess who gets the bill

2) Take the new inside role but request that the terms, nature and desc are very different to the previous outside service and just pay the paye - maybe you can get a rate hike to cover the Employers NI that you'll now be paying - all a bit of a risk if retro application takes place.

Personally I had to do (1) a couple of years ago as I'm public sector and the status reviews were just being applied blanked inside

theboss

7,276 posts

234 months

Tuesday 27th May
quotequote all
arfur said:
There has been a lot of outside roles now being determined as inside over the past couple of years

If you are providing a service outside and you are now expected to deliver the role (note not a service) as inside then you have two options

1) Exit immediately - HMRC can go back a number of years and if the now inside can be applied to the previous outside - guess who gets the bill

2) Take the new inside role but request that the terms, nature and desc are very different to the previous outside service and just pay the paye - maybe you can get a rate hike to cover the Employers NI that you'll now be paying - all a bit of a risk if retro application takes place.

Personally I had to do (1) a couple of years ago as I'm public sector and the status reviews were just being applied blanked inside
Agreed.

The problem as I see it, is a lot of 'inside' work now issued in the form of PAYE employment contracts are still outside in nature, just determined to be inside due to risk aversion and policy.

I've even had prospective clients approach me about doing 5/10 days of T&M professional services, totally autonomous working in keeping with B2B service provision, yet wants to issue a PAYE contract to cover it.

It's like me insisting that the bloke cutting my trees signs a PAYE contract for the job.

arfur

3,945 posts

229 months

Tuesday 27th May
quotequote all
theboss said:
arfur said:
There has been a lot of outside roles now being determined as inside over the past couple of years

If you are providing a service outside and you are now expected to deliver the role (note not a service) as inside then you have two options

1) Exit immediately - HMRC can go back a number of years and if the now inside can be applied to the previous outside - guess who gets the bill

2) Take the new inside role but request that the terms, nature and desc are very different to the previous outside service and just pay the paye - maybe you can get a rate hike to cover the Employers NI that you'll now be paying - all a bit of a risk if retro application takes place.

Personally I had to do (1) a couple of years ago as I'm public sector and the status reviews were just being applied blanked inside
Agreed.

The problem as I see it, is a lot of 'inside' work now issued in the form of PAYE employment contracts are still outside in nature, just determined to be inside due to risk aversion and policy.

I've even had prospective clients approach me about doing 5/10 days of T&M professional services, totally autonomous working in keeping with B2B service provision, yet wants to issue a PAYE contract to cover it.

It's like me insisting that the bloke cutting my trees signs a PAYE contract for the job.
Totally true. My current role in pubsec is defined as a set of deliverables, measured etc. I dont even have a laptop from the govt dept - i'm byod ! But still - it's inside or nothing .. :-(