What you are describing is the theory. What the rest of us are talking about is the reality. Since the recent changes, large numbers of freelance or contract p

What you are describing is the theory. What the rest of us are talking about is the reality. Since the recent changes, large numbers of freelance or contract positions are being deemed inside IR35, often without a proper assessment and in some cases even forced into an umbrella arrangement. Whether or not they were actually disguised employment does not matter to many clients affected by the changes. The result is that even genuine independents are ending up with all the tax implications of employment and yet none of the benefits, while still carrying all the risks and overheads of operating as an independent business, the worst of both worlds. Obviously that is not an attractive arrangement and that is why many people have gone permanent and many clients have had to become employers, losing the useful flexibility on both sides. A consequence of this is that the overall market for independent flexible labour has also shrunk, which makes it less efficient for clients still wanting to use it properly and increases risk and puts downward pressure on rates for the freelancers and contractors. No doubt there was always some abuse of the system for disguised employment purposes, but the evidence has always been sketchy about how much that really happened, and the changes in recent years have also hit the legitimate part of the independent workforce hard even if it was not the intended target.