Header logo
Log in
Listing Blogs Generic

HMRC lose yet another IR35 case – if they don’t understand IR35, how on earth do they expect businesses to?

After losing yet another IR35 case, IPSE's Andy Chamberlain raises three important questions for government when it comes to IR35 and how businesses are expected to operate.

Andy Chamberlain headshot
Andy Chamberlain
20 Mar 2019
2 minutes
Share

HMRC thought Lorraine Kelly, yes – the Lorraine Kelly – was operating inside IR35. They were wrong. It’s the highest profile IR35 case there has ever been, and they were asking for the biggest amount of money ever in an IR35 case (£1.2m) and they have lost – emphatically.

The case in a nutshell

This case came down to control – who controls the work that Kelly does? Is it ITV or Kelly herself? The tribunal was clear – it’s Kelly. They described Kelly as a ‘brand’, an entertainer who puts on a performance:

“In our view ITV was not employing a “servant” but rather purchasing a product, namely the brand and individual personality of Lorraine Kelly. We concluded that all this supports the conclusion that the Appellant was in business on its own account.”

Ultimately the tribunal found that not only did IR35 not apply, but that it clearly didn’t apply:

“In our view the level of control falls far substantially below the sufficient degree required to demonstrate a contract of service and we are satisfied that the factors strongly indicate that the contract was one for services.”

Court defeat raises more questions for government

This is the fourth case that HMRC has lost out of the five that have come to light in the last year. This appalling track record raises some obvious questions:

  1. How can the government realistically expect UK businesses to operate these rules when it’s clear its own tax department doesn’t understand when it applies and when it doesn’t?
  2. Is the government right when it says there is ‘widespread non-compliance’ with IR35 in the private sector? HMRC might believe there is non-compliance, but it seems quite likely that HMRC simply don’t understand the case law.
  3. Did HMRC put Kelly’s engagement through their own CEST tool? Presumably they did, and presumably it came out with an ‘inside IR35’ determination – which was wrong. Are HMRC now going to realise the tool’s not fit for purpose.

IPSE will use it’s position on the IR35 Forum to put these questions directly to HMRC.

Latest news & opinions

Why do self employed women earn less than men 2
Why do self-employed women earn less than men?
+3 more

Self-employed women earn £51 less per day than men on average, research shows. But what is driving the gap, and how can we close it?

11 Mar 2026
About us simpler
IPSE
Why the Post Offices 104m IR35 bill really matters 2
Why the Post Office’s £104m IR35 bill really matters
+3 more

Qdos CEO Seb Maley reflects on the Post Office's recent IR35 tax bill and encourages contractors to share their views on the legislation in a joint survey with IP...

11 Mar 2026
Seb2
Seb Maley
Self employed women earn 12000 less than men on average 2
Self-employed gender pay gap is £51 per day, research finds
+4 more

Self-employed women charge £51 less per day on average than men, the UK's self-employed association said.

09 Mar 2026
About us simpler
IPSE Press Office
IPSE-LOGO-HEADER

Join our newsletter

Registered in England and Wales, no 03770926. 4th Floor, 95 Gresham Street, City of London, London EC2V 7AB