> I do agree that some folks have been disguised employees, but the majority were not. Even that is a red herring. This angle has been created to gain public s

> I do agree that some folks have been disguised employees, but the majority were not. Even that is a red herring. This angle has been created to gain public support for the legislation. If you run a business, you have to charge more than you would get paid as an employee, simply because of your overheads, things like insurance, accounting and whatever else that is part of running a business and to cover for periods of downtime or to be able to hire someone else. It is easy to create envy in that situation, because the worker sitting next to you seems just like you, does the same job, so why they are paid more and pay "less" tax? Most employees don't understand how business works so they of course support these rules thinking contractors are gaming the system. But they don't understand that if the contractor gets replaced by a "disguised employee" from a big consultancy, exactly the same thing is happening, except the big consultancy is taking all the profit. But workers got gaslighted - big consultancy = real business, someone like you trying to run exactly the same business = disguised employee That's what it is about. IR35 basically targets service based business where the owner of the business is providing service. This is probably how most of businesses start and this legislation blocks that to fill the pockets of big corporations. That's insane.