Frankly haven't had any need for punctuation for 22 years so who cares but yes I loved my time at Harvard Business School its not all that big there was about 1800 on campus when I was there it was an amazing place at Allston on the Charles river with nine different campus covering its faculties with a specific business school, my first degree and professional training was in the UK but they did a student swap with my University MBA with theirs as it was so new in 1996 we were the first to study one at my Uni our MBA was invigilated by the Harvard Business School. I was quoting Keynes and his macro economic theorem which is basically the structural environment which all businesses operate in todays free market sadly unless unincorporated bodies were within the scope of PAYE until 2016 HMRC took a soft touch in compliance to Sole Traders and Partnerships I am sure you will agree that the IR35 is now all encompassing to all business structures.A single unintelligible sentence of 181 words. No paragraph structure and no punctuation. Random irrelevant factoids about Maslow and Keynes that have no relevance to the debate. It's not the logical, incisive work of someone who has studied at one of the world's top business schools. Not that one would expect to find a Harvard MBA stuffing around with IR35 cases.
Keynes, by the way, was a macro-economist who wrote nothing of note about business structure. Even if he had, he would have been the best part of a hundred years late. The basic business structure of limited liability companies dates back to the Joint Stock Companies Act 1856, the features of which were largely retained in the Companies Act 2006. I've given you the specific paragraph of the latter act which defines four types of company. Three of those types were defined in 1856.
Sole traders and partnerships are entirely relevant to IR35. Section 46 of Chapter 7 of the Income Tax (Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003 deals specifically with the case of unincorporated bodies. Here it is:
46 Cases involving unincorporated bodies etc.
(1) Section 44 also applies—
(a) if the worker personally provides, or is under an obligation to personally provide, the services in question as a partner in a firm or a member of an unincorporated body;
(b) if the agency in question is an unincorporated body of which the worker is a member.
(2) In a case within subsection (1)(a), remuneration receivable under or in consequence of the agency contract is to be treated for income tax purposes as income of the worker and not as income of the firm or body.
Note also the Section 44 (1) which states that the section applies if:
an individual (“the worker”) personally provides, or is under an obligation personally to provide, services (which are not excluded services) to another person (“the client”)
Nowhere does it mention exemptions for industry sectors, corporate structures or anything else. Its universal.