IR35 is the problem.

They were trying to say that she was nothing more than a ‘disguised employee’ and therefore should be subject to the same type of taxation as for an employee, minus a paltry 5% allowance for paying accountants, etc.

But she clearly wasn’t the same as an employee – no holiday, sickness or pension, no employment once those shows were finished, etc.

There are many IT contractors that are not much different to an employee, except for the rights listed above, and IR35 was designed to stop these people paying themselves minimum wage and the rest in dividends, but saying that 95% of your turnover must be taxed like a normal PAYE employee is far too harsh as it doesn’t allow you any room for training costs, buffereing the fact that, if you are properly contracting, you might not have full employment, etc.

It’s a screw up of a law.

There’s nothing wrong with U-Turning in a thread! It makes a bleedin change on here (The Internet)

There are many IT contractors that are not much different to an employee, except for the rights listed above, and IR35 was designed to stop these people paying themselves minimum wage and the rest in dividends,

To be fair, that is quite a significant ‘except’.

However, I’m a contractor and am happy to admit that some of the tax advantages could be quite legitimately looked at and closed down. IR35 though is a steamhammer to crack a nut.