Training costs

[mudskipper]

This is one that seems to come up a lot, with most forum users having a conservative view about what constitutes a legitimate training expense.

This article from the PGC/Abbey Tax seems to suggest a more inclusive view.

Language lessons are one example which I'm pretty sure we would have argued would fail the "wholly and exclusively" test.

The intention is to include all genuine training, in a range of competencies, which the employee would need to advance his/her career or to achieve a career move with his/her employer. For example, language training in preparation for a possible (but not agreed) move to an overseas branch would be included, but training in leisure type activities is not included unless, exceptionally, that activity has a genuine connection with work duties.

Maybe the rules can be interpreted with a little more flexibility than has been suggested.

[SueEllen]

Language lessons are one example which I'm pretty sure we would have argued would fail the "wholly and exclusively" test.

Maybe the rules can be interpreted with a little more flexibility than has been suggested.

To be fair the resident accountants have never stated you can't do language or other courses and put it through the books.

What they say is no straight away to people who try and put a degree normally in finance through the books without a logical explanation why it's a business expense instead of a personal one.

[mudskipper]

To be fair the resident accountants have never stated you can't do language or other courses and put it through the books.

What they say is no straight away to people who try and put a degree normally in finance through the books without a logical explanation why it's a business expense instead of a personal one.

As a permie, my employer paid for me to do an HND on day release (albeit many years ago). A different employer also paid for BCS qualifications and an OU course in project management. All of which helped me (personally) advance my career, which seems to be the criteria the article is suggesting. If that is the criteria, then I'd have thought a degree in finance (assuming you're working in that environment) could be a legitimate expense.

Not got a specific scenario in mind, but the article seems to contradict some of the advice we regularly see here.

[northernladuk]

From what I can see that kinda throws the doors open to pretty much anything. Any management type course will definately be counted in that regardless as it is plausible in the future you will move to manage people. It also seems to say that if you want to do an Open University taking 6+ years that will be fine as well.

The open comment about , 'language training in preparation for a possible (but not agreed) move to an overseas branch' seems to pretty much throw the door open. If you want to take a course in a totally unrelated technology you can say it is possible (but not agreed) that you will use it to get a contract. Just seems wide open to abuse and interpretation.

Not sure about the finance degree, can't see how that would be useful to an IT contractor even if you are working for a financial client. Finance courses to help with your accounts but Finance Degree seems a bit too woolly IMO

Looks far to open to be real, particluarly compared to the fairly hard line we have seen on here.

I don't buy it and would still ask my accountant first.

[SueEllen]

As a permie, my employer paid for me to do an HND on day release (albeit many years ago). A different employer also paid for BCS qualifications and an OU course in project management. All of which helped me (personally) advance my career, which seems to be the criteria the article is suggesting. If that is the criteria, then I'd have thought a degree in finance (assuming you're working in that environment) could be a legitimate expense.

Not got a specific scenario in mind, but the article seems to contradict some of the advice we regularly see here.

The advice given here was because the culprit couldn't answer why their degree/course was of any benefit to the business and they weren't working in the area.

It is harder for a one person company to argue that their course is "wholly and exclusively" for the business particularly if it's a long course, than for a company with 100+ employees.

If I had 100+ employees I could train one of them up to be the finance director and pay for all their accountancy courses (which happened to one of my mates) , but how do you argue if you run a one person company that you need to train yourself up to be that highly qualified in finance when your main business is computing or engineering?

The easiest way to argue for a one person company that it's wholly and exclusively for the business (which I've used to get some OU courses through my books ) is to have basic qualifications/skills in the subject area already, have a client where the skills are used when you sign up for the courses, and then get another client shortly after you finish the courses where those skills are a benefit.

Even with courses in your main business area i.e. computing, engineering, if you can't justify why you did them to your accountant then don't expect them to allow them to be put through the books.

[SueEllen]

From what I can see that kinda throws the doors open to pretty much anything. Any management type course will definately be counted in that regardless as it is plausible in the future you will move to manage people. It also seems to say that if you want to do an Open University taking 6+ years that will be fine as well.

OU courses are modular so it would easy to make up a justification for each module you do, so you end with enough modules to get a degree.

The open comment about , 'language training in preparation for a possible (but not agreed) move to an overseas branch' seems to pretty much throw the door open. If you want to take a course in a totally unrelated technology you can say it is possible (but not agreed) that you will use it to get a contract. Just seems wide open to abuse and interpretation.

One man limited companies don't tend to have overseas branches.

However if you work in London there are enough clients who are international enough where learning a language would be useful - even if it is just so they don't have to bother to get emails/documents translated for you.

[northernladuk]

OU courses are modular so it would easy to make up a justification for each module you do, so you end with enough modules to get a degree.

You are talking to someone who spent 6 years doing an OU degree and got 2 years in to an OU MBA The modules are just not specific enough in most cases such has having to do a Maths foundation to even start looking at the custom modules. I get your point though.

One man limited companies don't tend to have overseas branches.

However if you work in London there are enough clients who are international enough where learning a language would be useful - even if it is just so they don't have to bother to get emails/documents translated for you.

Yeah agreed but that isn't a good example as you say. My other example of someone taking a completely different technology course i.e. I am in Service Delivery but I take a SQL course for a 'possible (but not agreed)' move in to DB work is better. Something like that.

[GillsMan]

OU courses are modular so it would easy to make up a justification for each module you do, so you end with enough modules to get a degree.

That's pretty much what my accountant said when I enquired. I started a Computing & Business degree, but dropped after a few courses. But essentially, the ones relating to computing were generally allowable (and, to be fair, they gave me skills that I have genuinely used to secure new business) but the ones about generic business weren't. Seemed fair enough to me.

[SueEllen]

That's pretty much what my accountant said when I enquired. I started a Computing & Business degree, but dropped after a few courses. But essentially, the ones relating to computing were generally allowable (and, to be fair, they gave me skills that I have genuinely used to secure new business) but the ones about generic business weren't. Seemed fair enough to me.

The fees for existing students doing OU courses go up a lot in 2017 so if you can try and finish your degree by then.

[GillsMan]

The fees for existing students doing OU courses go up a lot in 2017 so if you can finish your degree by then it's a good idea to try.

Oh I didn't get that far and, to be honest, I'm not sure I really need a degree. I'm concentrating on Adobe/Microsoft qualifications (for which I have no qualms about putting it through my company).