IR35 Changes 2026: What’s New, Who’s Affected & Next Steps

The IR35 changes have fundamentally altered how UK employers engage contractors and manage off-payroll working arrangements. While IR35 is a tax regime rather than an employment law framework, the reforms now sit squarely within the remit of HR, finance and senior leadership, carrying material compliance, cost and reputational risk for businesses that get them wrong.

For employers, the IR35 changes are not about a new tax, nor do they prohibit the use of contractors or personal service companies. Instead, they shift legal responsibility for determining employment status for tax purposes away from contractors and onto organisations that engage them. This shift has created new decision-making obligations, exposure to HMRC enforcement, and operational challenges that go far beyond payroll mechanics, including control, supervision and documentation discipline that often intersects with wider HR governance and employee relations risk.

What this article is about
This article explains what the IR35 changes mean for UK employers in practice. It focuses on how the rules affect hiring decisions, contractor engagement models, risk management and compliance governance. It is written for HR professionals, business owners and senior decision-makers who need clarity, defensible processes and a clear understanding of what the law requires, what choices employers must make, and what the consequences are if they get those choices wrong.

Section A: What are the IR35 changes and why do they matter to employers?

The phrase “IR35 changes” is widely used, but often poorly understood. For employers, the importance of the reforms lies not in the original IR35 legislation itself, but in how responsibility for compliance has shifted and how that shift changes risk ownership, commercial exposure and internal accountability.

1. What are the IR35 changes employers need to understand?

IR35 is the informal name given to legislation introduced in 2000 to counter tax avoidance where individuals supply their services through an intermediary, such as a personal service company, while working in a way that is effectively indistinguishable from employment. The legislation has always focused on whether, ignoring the intermediary, the individual would be regarded as an employee for tax purposes.

What changed under the IR35 reforms is not the underlying concept of assessing the reality of the working relationship, but who applies that assessment, who must evidence it, and who bears the financial consequences if it is wrong.

Historically, responsibility for assessing whether IR35 applied typically sat with the contractor’s intermediary, often their personal service company, through self-assessment. The reforms shift responsibility upstream to the organisation receiving the services, meaning affected employers must now put in place a structured process for making determinations, documenting reasoning, and managing payroll consequences where the rules apply. This is one reason IR35 compliance now behaves like a governance issue rather than a purely technical payroll question, particularly where contractor engagement decisions affect workforce planning and retention outcomes. For businesses using contractors to plug gaps, scale projects or protect delivery timelines, the HR impact of conservative decisions can be real, including disruption to specialist hiring and knock-on consequences for employee retention strategies in teams that rely on contingent capability.

2. When did the IR35 changes take effect and who do they apply to?

The IR35 regime has developed in stages, and the timeline matters for employer compliance.

The original IR35 legislation came into force in April 2000. In April 2017, the government reformed the off-payroll working rules for the public sector, shifting responsibility for employment status determinations for tax purposes from contractors to public authorities.

The most significant change for private sector and third sector employers took effect on 6 April 2021. From that date, medium and large organisations engaging contractors through intermediaries became responsible for determining status for tax purposes and issuing a Status Determination Statement. Where the rules apply, PAYE must be operated by the relevant fee payer, which in practice requires disciplined payroll processes, correctly structured reference data and clear organisational ownership of tax accountability. Employers who underestimate the operational lift often discover late that basic payroll infrastructure and record identifiers, such as consistent internal payroll setup and the organisation’s payroll number, become more important when managing risk at scale.

Since April 2021, IR35 compliance has therefore been an ongoing employer duty for affected organisations, not a transitional issue. Enforcement risk is amplified where determinations are inconsistent, undocumented or misaligned with how managers supervise and integrate contractors into teams, including through monitoring practices that can undermine an “independent contractor” position if used carelessly. This is one reason employers should view contractor oversight in the round, including how employee monitoring tools and policies are applied in mixed workforces.

3. Why did the government reform IR35?

The policy rationale behind the IR35 changes is rooted in fairness, tax integrity and enforcement efficiency.

HMRC concluded that the original framework was not delivering consistent compliance at scale, in part because it relied heavily on self-assessment by intermediaries with a direct financial incentive to classify engagements as outside the rules. By shifting responsibility to organisations that engage contractors, the government aimed to align tax outcomes more closely with the reality of working arrangements and to make compliance enforceable through fewer, more accountable entities.

For employers, however, this policy shift means becoming the primary risk holder. The reforms move tax compliance upstream, making businesses the focal point for enforcement, audits and liability where determinations are incorrect, where “reasonable care” has not been taken, or where documentation fails to explain why a conclusion was reached. In practical terms, IR35 changes mean senior leaders must be able to defend contractor engagement decisions as risk-managed business choices, not informal hiring workarounds, and must be able to demonstrate that compliance controls exist and are operating in practice.

Section A summary
The IR35 changes matter to employers because they reallocate responsibility and risk. While the core question remains whether an individual would be treated as an employee for tax purposes if engaged directly, the obligation to make and evidence that determination now sits with medium and large organisations that engage contractors through intermediaries. Since 6 April 2021, IR35 compliance has been an ongoing employer duty backed by enforcement risk and potential financial exposure, and it should be managed as a governance and workforce risk issue rather than a narrow payroll task.

Section B: Which employers are affected by the IR35 changes?

A critical step in managing IR35 risk is understanding whether the reforms apply to your organisation at all. The IR35 changes do not impose identical obligations on every business. Instead, legal responsibility is determined primarily by organisational size, legal structure and, in some cases, group relationships. Misunderstanding scope is one of the most common and costly employer errors because it can lead to either inadvertent non-compliance or unnecessary over-correction that disrupts access to specialist talent.

1. Which businesses fall within scope of the IR35 changes?

The IR35 changes apply to medium and large-sized organisations in the private and third sectors. Where an organisation is within scope, it must determine the employment status of individuals engaged through intermediaries for tax purposes and issue a Status Determination Statement. This includes many charities and voluntary organisations where they meet the applicable size thresholds.

A business is classed as medium or large if it meets two or more of the following criteria:

• An annual turnover of more than £10.2 million.
• A balance sheet total of more than £5.1 million.
• More than 50 employees.

The balance sheet total refers to the total assets shown on the balance sheet before deducting liabilities. The relevant assessment is typically based on the organisation’s most recent accounts, so employers should treat scope as a live issue, especially where growth, restructuring or acquisitions may tip an organisation into scope.

For employers, the practical point is that IR35 scope is not determined by industry, by whether contractors are “high value”, or by whether an engagement looks short-term. If the organisation is medium or large, the rules potentially apply to any contractor engaged through an intermediary where the nature of the working relationship indicates employment-like working for tax purposes.

2. How do group structures and connected companies affect IR35?

Group structures can significantly complicate IR35 compliance and are frequently overlooked. Where an organisation is part of a corporate group, the “small company” exemption may not be available even where a particular subsidiary appears small when assessed in isolation.

In practice, if the parent undertaking of a group is medium or large, subsidiaries within the group may also be treated as medium or large for off-payroll working purposes. This can create group-wide exposure, particularly where contractor hiring is decentralised and local decision-makers assume exemption based on entity-level headcount or turnover.

For HR and finance leaders, the risk is that contractor engagement decisions are made without a group-aware compliance framework, leading to inconsistent determinations and weak audit trails. Where labour supply is managed through agencies, the risk can be amplified by contractual chain complexity and blurred responsibility between the end-client and those supplying labour as intermediaries. This is also where employer understanding of agency engagement frameworks can become relevant, including how organisations manage contingent labour through agencies and associated compliance frameworks such as agency worker arrangements and the Agency Worker Regulations.

3. Are small businesses exempt from the IR35 changes?

Small private sector businesses are generally exempt from the 2021 off-payroll working reforms. Where the exemption applies, responsibility for determining whether IR35 applies remains with the contractor’s intermediary rather than the engaging business.

However, exemption is often misunderstood in practice. It is not enough to assume a business is “small” because it has a small HR function, because it hires contractors occasionally, or because it has fewer than 50 employees. The statutory size tests must be applied and should be reviewed periodically, particularly where growth is expected or where group relationships may affect scope.

From a risk management perspective, small businesses should still take care to document how and why they believe the exemption applies. In the event of an HMRC enquiry, being able to demonstrate that scope was assessed deliberately, rather than assumed, helps protect the organisation’s position and supports defensible decision-making.

4. What happens when agencies are involved and who carries liability?

Where agencies are involved, employers should distinguish between the party responsible for making the determination and the party responsible for operating PAYE if IR35 applies. The end-client is responsible for making the status determination for tax purposes and issuing a Status Determination Statement to the relevant parties. The “fee payer”, often the entity paying the contractor’s intermediary, is typically responsible for operating PAYE and accounting for employer National Insurance contributions where the engagement is inside IR35.

This division of responsibility can create operational and legal risk if the contractual chain is not understood. Employers should ensure their agency terms support information flow, evidence gathering and auditability, and that internal stakeholders understand the difference between tax compliance obligations and employment rights obligations when using agency-supplied labour. In practice, organisations often need a coherent approach across off-payroll and agency engagement, including understanding the legal framework for employment law when hiring agency workers alongside tax compliance requirements under the off-payroll rules.

Section B summary
The IR35 changes apply to medium and large private and third sector organisations, with scope determined by statutory size tests and, in some cases, group relationships. Small businesses may be exempt, but only where the exemption clearly applies on the facts. Where agencies are involved, employers must understand the end-client and fee payer roles and ensure their processes support defensible status determinations for tax purposes. Correctly identifying whether the organisation is within scope is a threshold compliance decision. Getting it wrong can mean unknowingly assuming liability for tax and penalties or unnecessarily restricting contractor engagement in ways that damage commercial flexibility.

Section C: What do the IR35 changes require employers to do in practice?

Once an organisation is within scope of the IR35 changes, compliance becomes an active and ongoing obligation. The reforms impose specific legal duties on employers that affect HR processes, contractor engagement decisions, payroll operations and risk governance. These are not abstract requirements. They translate directly into what employers must do, document and be able to defend if challenged by HMRC.

1. Who is responsible for determining IR35 status after the changes?

Under the post-2021 off-payroll working rules, the end-client is responsible for determining whether the IR35 rules apply where it is a medium or large organisation. This means the organisation receiving the contractor’s services must decide whether, ignoring the intermediary, the individual would be regarded as an employee for tax purposes.

This responsibility cannot be passed to the contractor. While employers may take advice from agencies or professional advisers, legal accountability for the determination rests with the end-client. Where a determination is not made, or where reasonable care is not exercised, liability for unpaid tax and National Insurance contributions can rest with the employer even if another party operates payroll.

For HR and business leaders, this creates a direct link between how work is structured in practice and tax exposure. Decisions about supervision, control, integration into teams and performance management can all affect the defensibility of a determination and should be considered alongside broader HR governance and workforce risk.

2. What is a Status Determination Statement and why is it critical?

A Status Determination Statement (SDS) is a mandatory document under the IR35 changes. It must set out the employer’s conclusion on whether the engagement falls inside or outside IR35 and, critically, explain the reasons for that conclusion.

An SDS must be provided to both the individual contractor and the party the organisation contracts with, such as an agency. Until a compliant SDS is issued, the end-client retains liability for tax and National Insurance contributions regardless of how the contractor is paid.

From a compliance perspective, the SDS is one of the first documents HMRC will request during an enquiry. Poorly reasoned or generic statements undermine claims that reasonable care has been taken and increase the risk that liability will transfer back to the employer. For organisations engaging multiple contractors, SDS quality and consistency are key indicators of whether IR35 is being managed systematically or reactively.

3. What does “reasonable care” mean in IR35 determinations?

The requirement to take reasonable care sits at the heart of the IR35 changes and is a frequent source of employer risk. Reasonable care requires organisations to take informed, proportionate steps to understand the legal test, gather accurate information about working practices and reach a conclusion based on evidence rather than assumptions.

Common failures include relying solely on contractual wording that does not reflect reality, applying blanket determinations to entire groups of contractors, or delegating decisions to untrained staff without oversight. HMRC has made clear that these approaches are unlikely to satisfy the reasonable care standard.

If reasonable care is not taken, a determination can be treated as invalid. In practical terms, this means the employer may be held liable for unpaid tax and National Insurance contributions even where it believed the engagement fell outside IR35. For businesses, this reinforces the need for structured assessment processes and internal accountability.

4. Who operates PAYE and pays employer National Insurance contributions?

Where an engagement is determined to fall inside IR35, the responsibility for deducting Income Tax and employee National Insurance contributions through PAYE falls on the fee payer. The fee payer is the entity that pays the contractor’s intermediary and may be the end-client or an agency within the contractual chain.

In addition to operating PAYE, the fee payer must account for employer National Insurance contributions. This represents a direct cost to the business and often has budgetary implications where roles move from outside to inside IR35.

Employers should ensure they understand how payment flows through their supply chain and how PAYE obligations interact with payroll systems, reference data and HMRC reporting requirements. Weak understanding of fee payer mechanics is a common cause of compliance failure.

5. How often must IR35 determinations be reviewed?

IR35 determinations are not a one-off exercise. Employers are expected to review determinations where there is a material change in circumstances, such as changes to duties, supervision, location or duration of the engagement.

Working practices often evolve over time, particularly where contractors are retained on successive projects. A determination that was reasonable at the outset may become inaccurate if the role drifts towards greater integration or control. Periodic review forms part of exercising reasonable care and supports defensible compliance if decisions are later scrutinised.

Section C summary
The IR35 changes impose clear, ongoing duties on employers. Medium and large organisations must make informed status determinations for tax purposes, issue compliant Status Determination Statements, exercise reasonable care and understand where PAYE and employer National Insurance liabilities sit within their supply chains. These requirements affect HR, finance and operational decision-making and require structured processes rather than informal or reactive approaches.

Section D: What are the risks if employers get IR35 wrong?

The IR35 changes are underpinned by enforcement risk. For employers, incorrect determinations, weak processes or incomplete documentation can result in financial exposure that extends far beyond individual contractor engagements. Understanding the nature of these risks is essential for informed decision-making at board and senior management level.

1. What financial risks arise from IR35 non-compliance?

Where an employer fails to comply with the off-payroll working rules, HMRC can pursue the organisation for unpaid Income Tax and National Insurance contributions that should have been deducted under PAYE. This includes employer National Insurance contributions, which represent a direct and often unbudgeted cost to the business.

In addition to the underlying tax liability, HMRC may charge interest on late-paid amounts and impose financial penalties. Penalty exposure increases significantly where HMRC concludes that the organisation failed to take reasonable care when making status determinations or relied on assumptions rather than evidence.

For organisations that engage multiple contractors, liabilities can accumulate quickly. HMRC has the power to look back over several tax years, meaning historic engagements may be reassessed long after projects have ended and budgets have been closed.

2. How do HMRC investigations and audits typically arise?

HMRC enquiries into IR35 compliance are rarely limited to a single engagement. In practice, investigations often begin with a targeted review and then expand into a broader examination of the organisation’s contractor population, governance framework and internal controls.

Common triggers include inconsistent or blanket determinations, complaints from contractors, discrepancies identified during wider PAYE audits, or a failure to issue compliant Status Determination Statements. Once an enquiry is opened, HMRC will typically request evidence of reasonable care, copies of determinations, contracts and details of actual working practices.

Where failures are identified, HMRC may seek to transfer liability up the labour supply chain. This is particularly relevant where agencies are involved and where information has not flowed correctly between the end-client and the fee payer.

3. Can IR35 mistakes create wider employment law exposure?

Although IR35 is a tax regime, poor handling of off-payroll working can increase the risk of employment law disputes. While an inside IR35 determination does not of itself confer employment rights, working arrangements that closely resemble employment can encourage individuals to challenge their classification.

Inconsistent treatment, unclear documentation or heavy levels of supervision and control may prompt claims for worker or employee status under employment law. This can expose organisations to disputes over pay, holiday entitlement or dismissal, creating parallel risk alongside tax exposure. Employers should therefore ensure that IR35 compliance decisions are aligned with broader employment practices and do not inadvertently undermine the organisation’s wider employment law position.

4. What reputational and commercial risks do employers face?

IR35 non-compliance can also give rise to reputational damage, particularly where enforcement action becomes public or disrupts key projects. Sudden reclassification of contractors, backdated tax demands or disputes with agencies can affect delivery timelines and strain commercial relationships.

In regulated sectors or where public contracts are involved, failures in tax compliance may affect tendering opportunities or stakeholder confidence. As a result, IR35 risk should be treated as a strategic governance issue rather than a narrow payroll concern, with oversight at senior level.

Section D summary
Getting IR35 wrong can expose employers to significant financial, legal and reputational risk. HMRC enforcement focuses on employer processes and governance rather than isolated errors. Incorrect determinations, failure to take reasonable care or weak documentation can result in retrospective tax liabilities, penalties and wider workforce disputes. Effective IR35 compliance is therefore a core risk management function, not an administrative afterthought.

Section E: How should HR and business leaders manage IR35 risk strategically?

The IR35 changes require more than technical compliance. For HR professionals and business leaders, the challenge is to design contractor engagement models that balance flexibility with defensible risk management. Strategic handling of IR35 can reduce exposure, preserve access to specialist skills and avoid unintended employment law consequences that arise from poorly aligned working practices.

1. How should organisations structure contractor engagement post-IR35?

One of the most common mistakes employers make following the IR35 changes is treating status determinations as isolated administrative decisions. In reality, how roles are designed, supervised and integrated into the organisation has a direct bearing on whether an engagement can be defended as outside IR35.

Engagements that resemble permanent roles, involve ongoing supervision, or embed contractors into internal reporting lines are more likely to fall inside IR35. Employers should therefore consider whether work can be structured around clearly defined deliverables rather than time-based obligations, and whether independence exists in practice rather than solely on paper.

Some organisations respond to IR35 risk by imposing blanket bans on contractors or making universal inside IR35 determinations. While these approaches may reduce immediate tax exposure, they can significantly increase costs, reduce access to specialist capability and undermine workforce flexibility. They may also attract HMRC scrutiny if determinations are not supported by evidence. From an HR strategy perspective, overly cautious approaches can disrupt project delivery and damage long-term employee retention outcomes in teams that rely on contingent expertise.

2. Should employers rely on HMRC’s CEST tool?

HMRC’s Check Employment Status for Tax (CEST) tool is commonly used by employers when assessing IR35 status. HMRC has stated that it will stand by the result produced by CEST provided the information entered is accurate and reflects the reality of the working arrangement.

However, reliance on CEST should be approached with caution. The tool does not bind employment tribunals or courts, and it does not remove the employer’s obligation to exercise reasonable care. Incorrect or incomplete inputs can invalidate the outcome, and employers remain responsible for the decision even where CEST is used.

In practice, CEST is most effective when used as part of a wider assessment framework rather than as a substitute for judgment. Employers should ensure that those completing the tool understand the legal tests and that outcomes are reviewed for consistency and plausibility, particularly in borderline cases.

3. When should employers seek professional advice on IR35?

Professional advice is particularly valuable where engagements sit close to the boundary between employment and self-employment, where multiple agencies are involved, or where contractors perform functions similar to employees. Advice can also be critical when organisations are restructuring contractor models or responding to HMRC enquiries.

From a risk management perspective, obtaining professional input and documenting the rationale for decisions can help demonstrate reasonable care if determinations are later challenged. This is especially relevant where IR35 compliance intersects with wider workforce risk issues, including supervision practices, performance management and the potential spillover into employment law claims.

4. How can employers integrate IR35 compliance into HR governance?

Effective IR35 management requires coordination across HR, finance, procurement and legal teams. Clear ownership, consistent processes and regular review are essential. Hiring managers should understand how day-to-day management decisions, such as directing work or monitoring performance, can affect IR35 outcomes and wider employment law risk.

Organisations should also monitor changes in working arrangements and revisit determinations where roles evolve. Treating IR35 as a living compliance issue rather than a one-off exercise reduces the risk of drift and strengthens the organisation’s overall governance position.

Section E summary
Strategic management of IR35 risk requires employers to look beyond individual determinations and consider how contractor engagements are designed and governed. By aligning role structures, assessment processes and decision-making frameworks, organisations can reduce exposure while retaining workforce flexibility. Effective IR35 compliance is as much about HR strategy and governance as it is about tax administration.

Section F: What has not changed under IR35?

Amid the focus on reform and enforcement, it is equally important for employers to understand what the IR35 changes have not altered. Misunderstandings in this area often lead to over-cautious decisions that increase cost, restrict access to talent or create unnecessary employment law risk.

1. Do the IR35 changes give contractors employment rights?

One of the most persistent misconceptions following the IR35 changes is that a contractor assessed as inside IR35 becomes an employee for all legal purposes. This is not the case.

IR35 determines employment status for tax purposes only. An inside IR35 determination means that Income Tax and National Insurance contributions are deducted as if the individual were an employee, but it does not confer employment rights such as unfair dismissal protection, statutory sick pay or holiday pay.

That said, employers should remain cautious. While tax status and employment status are legally distinct, working arrangements that closely mirror employment can encourage individuals to pursue claims under employment law. Clear documentation, consistent treatment and alignment between contractual terms and reality are therefore essential to reduce spillover risk into wider employment law disputes.

2. Can contractors still operate through personal service companies?

The IR35 changes do not prohibit the use of personal service companies. Contractors may continue to provide services through intermediaries where the engagement is structured and operated in a way that supports genuine self-employment for tax purposes.

For employers, continued use of PSCs can still offer flexibility and access to specialist skills, particularly for project-based or short-term work. The critical issue is not the existence of a PSC, but whether the working relationship demonstrates independence in practice, including autonomy over how work is delivered and an absence of employment-like control.

Engaging contractors through PSCs does not automatically reduce cost or risk. Each engagement must be assessed on its own facts, and assumptions based solely on corporate structure are unlikely to withstand HMRC scrutiny. Employers should ensure that their approach to PSC engagement aligns with broader workforce governance and risk management objectives.

3. Are genuinely self-employed contractors affected by the IR35 changes?

Genuinely self-employed contractors who operate independently, control how their work is carried out and bear financial risk are not the target of the IR35 changes. Where an engagement falls outside IR35, the contractor’s intermediary remains responsible for meeting its own tax obligations.

However, employers must be able to evidence that independence. This includes demonstrating that working practices align with contractual terms and that the individual is not treated as part of the organisation’s workforce. Drift over time, such as increased supervision or integration into internal teams, can undermine an outside IR35 position if left unmanaged.

For employers, the practical challenge lies in distinguishing genuine self-employment from arrangements that have gradually become employment-like. Regular review of working practices and clear boundaries around control and substitution are therefore critical to maintaining a defensible position.

Section F summary
The IR35 changes do not eliminate contractors, confer employment rights or alter the legal distinction between tax status and employment status. What they do require is greater discipline from employers in how contractor engagements are structured, assessed and managed. Understanding what has not changed is as important as understanding what has, helping organisations avoid unnecessary over-correction while maintaining compliance.

IR35 changes: Employer FAQs

What are the IR35 changes in simple terms?
The IR35 changes shift responsibility for determining employment status for tax purposes from contractors to medium and large organisations that engage them. Where IR35 applies, Income Tax and National Insurance must be deducted through PAYE by the relevant fee payer, rather than being self-assessed by the contractor’s intermediary.

Do the IR35 changes apply to all contractors?
No. The changes apply only where individuals provide services through intermediaries such as personal service companies and where the engaging organisation is medium or large in size. Genuinely self-employed contractors may still fall outside IR35 where the facts support independence.

Do the IR35 changes apply to all businesses?
No. Small private sector businesses are generally exempt. Where the exemption applies, responsibility for IR35 compliance remains with the contractor’s intermediary rather than the engaging organisation. However, size must be assessed carefully, particularly where group structures exist.

Who is responsible for IR35 compliance when agencies are involved?
The end-client is responsible for making the status determination and issuing a Status Determination Statement. The fee payer, often an agency, is responsible for operating PAYE where IR35 applies. Liability can shift if statutory obligations are not met.

What happens if an employer fails to issue a Status Determination Statement?
If no compliant Status Determination Statement is issued, the end-client may remain liable for tax and National Insurance contributions, even where another party pays the contractor.

Can contractors challenge an IR35 determination?
Yes. Employers must operate a disagreement process and respond within 45 days. Failure to do so can result in liability transferring back to the employer.

Do IR35 changes increase employment law risk?
Not directly. IR35 affects tax status only. However, employment-like working practices can increase the risk of claims under employment law, so alignment between tax compliance and HR practice is essential.

How often should IR35 determinations be reviewed?
Determinations should be reviewed where there is a material change in duties, supervision or working practices. Periodic review also supports the requirement to take reasonable care.

Conclusion

The IR35 changes represent a fundamental shift in how off-payroll working is regulated in the UK, placing employers at the centre of compliance and enforcement. For medium and large organisations, IR35 is no longer a contractor issue but a core HR, finance and governance responsibility.

Employers must understand whether they fall within scope, make defensible status determinations for tax purposes, issue compliant Status Determination Statements and manage PAYE and employer National Insurance liabilities accurately. Failure to do so can result in significant financial exposure, HMRC enforcement action and wider workforce risk.

Handled strategically, IR35 compliance does not require abandoning contractor engagement or flexible working models. Instead, it requires structured decision-making, alignment between contracts and working practices, and active risk management. For HR professionals and business leaders, IR35 should be treated as an ongoing compliance discipline rather than a one-off regulatory hurdle.

Glossary

Useful Links