Rented accommodation

[TheCyclingProgrammer]

But reading the original post, this isn't what the OP is talking about. He is talking about renting a flat now, for him and his girlfriend, and getting the company to pay for it all. That doesn't sound like the purpose is changing at all - the purpose from the outset is for the company to pay for him and his girlfriend to live together and not pay for it themselves.

I think we all have our own interpretation of OPs intentions and obviously this makes a huge difference.

I was reading it as: the OP needs to rent the flat anyway, and his partner might be able to change her work pattern so she can spend some time with him while he is in London.

Of course if OP has a low tolerance to risk they should probably just limit it to the occasional visit or not at all.

[ASB]

I certainly agree that HMRC don't seem to like employers providing living accommodation, even if it's only because it's cheaper than a hotel. I don't fully understand why they make the distinction, but they seem to consider it as having an intrinsic duality of purpose regardless, as shown in the Healy case.

Is the idea that only staying during the week makes renting a flat acceptable something that is backed up by HMRC guidance or is it simply yet another thing they haven't challenged yet?

It is not in HMRC interest to have anything too formal. Certainly there is a general idea of "accepted practice". In effect this means not challenged. But it can mean more than that, e.g. challenged and accepted. Over the years HMRC has been getting tougher.

As a general principle, pay rent, claim the relevant expenses, take a chunk of it as BIK and it is probably right. Though putting GF in there might cloud that somewhat.

What I have done over the years (and these have all passed challenge in my own and now dissolved company) is:-

- Rented a flat in company name on a "company let". This was occupied by my then GF (now ex wife) during the week. I would visit during the week from time to time and we would sometimes stay weekends. (Shw was a fee earner and 40% shareholder).
- Ditto but in my personal name. She couldn't rent it in her name for some reason I forget.
- Personally bought a house near my previous main clients. Charged mortgage interest + 100% of council tax etc.

The only thing HMIT wanted was that should show some bik. So, we did discuss how often I stayed weekends, how often the family visited etc. We agreed on a fairly modest figure - 500 quid I think.

I'm far from convinced it would be as easy these days.

If the OP is claiming for himself and his own occupation then it seems to me that it is not outrageous, but should form a view with their accountants as to likely risk.

With the GF visiting occasionally then seems OK.

With the GF living their and seeking work etc ??

Well, worth a try I suppose, but if investigated I can't really imagine it succeeding. Quite obviously it is of huge benefit to the GF and there is an implicit move in place to where the property is.

Maybe if the OP is non risk averse he could consider the relocation expenses argument. (Probably hopeless though).

[cojak]

I think the posts here demonstrate how people in this site work:-

There are those (me, NLUK, Faqqer) who operate on the basis of what can we do that's easy and won't annoy HMRC

and those who operate on the basis of how far can I push the boundary as HMRC will never know. Which is fine if HMRC don't find out, but potentially very expensive if HMRC do find out...


This is definitely a case where its pushing the limits while providing HMRC with multiple means of attack....

Guess from which forum this post originated...

[sal]

I think the posts here demonstrate how people in this site work:-

There are those (me, NLUK, Faqqer) who operate on the basis of what can we do that's easy and won't annoy HMRC

and those who operate on the basis of how far can I push the boundary as HMRC will never know. Which is fine if HMRC don't find out, but potentially very expensive if HMRC do find out...


This is definitely a case where its pushing the limits while providing HMRC with multiple means of attack....

Setting the GF aside, is it so outrageous to claim accommodation as expense, just like travel and meals?

If not, how is it going to annoy the HMRC in the first place, in order to trigger inspection and potentially discover that the GF was using the said accommodation.

And the laptop example was given, to argue against "holier than thou" members that condemn others for using the system, while doing the same themselves. Now don't tell me your other half never used the laptop purchased with company funds or even have one of her/his own...

So get off your high horses, please.

[eek]

Setting the GF aside, is it so outrageous to claim accommodation as expense, just like travel and meals?

If not, how is it going to annoy the HMRC in the first place, in order to trigger inspection and potentially discover that the GF was using the said accommodation.

And the laptop example was given, to argue against "holier than thou" members that condemn others for using the system, while doing the same themselves. Now don't tell me your other half never used the laptop purchased with company funds or even have one of her/his own...

So get off your high horses, please.

The company has purchased 1 MacBook retina and 1 iPad mini.
Mrs eek does not want to learn another operating system and therefore uses the 8 year old windows box in the corner of the dining room which I bought when a permie. She also has my old ipad 3 (also bought when I was a permie).

I would be very careful picking an argument with me on being Whiter than white. My accounts are very very boring. So much so that I reckon HMRC would have a detailed look to see what I'm really trying to hide..

[dezze]

No, it's the right forum, I've moved it from the wrong forum. He's asking an accounting question.

It was under HMRC Scheme Enquiries on my tablet yesterday? Must have been moved in the meantime.

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

This is a tricky one as we don't know the whole story. If the OP has been commuting for the last few months from home to London and has recently decided that he would like to live with his girlfriend, who already lives and works in London but doesn't want to give up his own property for the time being then I can't see that this would be allowable. However, if the OP has secured the contract and has already signed a rental agreement as the commute is not feasible then I can't see that his girlfriend coming round on the nights that he was there would cause HMRC a problem

[Contreras]

But that is not the HMRC argument. The HMRC questions are:-

1) is it wholly for business
2) has it become his base...

While he may be able to argue 1 (and I doubt it) he definitely would be hard pushed to argue 2 with girlie being there...

I think that sums it up nicely. 1) is faintly plausible if you argue there no additional expense. 2) very difficult to argue. Hector would not be happy. There may be example scenarios in the HMRC guidance, e.g. larger hotel room to accommodate family member(s), that could be extrapolated to the OP's scenario.

[northernladuk]

Setting the GF aside, is it so outrageous to claim accommodation as expense, just like travel and meals?

If not, how is it going to annoy the HMRC in the first place, in order to trigger inspection and potentially discover that the GF was using the said accommodation.

But you can't set the girlfriend aside. She is key to this whole discussion. Without her then yes it won't be a problem as the rules clearly allow it.

The expenses guide from Nixon Williams linked below clearly states the employee should not be accompanied by family Page 7). If you want to go against professional advice and rule of the law and act in a 'get away with it because you won't get caught' then good luck to you but expect flack from people that try do to things properly.

http://www.nixonwilliams.com/images/...es%20Guide.pdf

And the laptop example was given, to argue against "holier than thou" members that condemn others for using the system, while doing the same themselves. Now don't tell me your other half never used the laptop purchased with company funds or even have one of her/his own...

So get off your high horses, please.

My other half has her own laptop, smart phone and tablet. Occasionally she will use mine to browse something but none of her files on it so generally she doesn't. The kids are most certainly not allowed on it. All of which is in keeping with advice on pages such as the one below..

Business expenses: Least taxing way to buy a computer? :: Contractor UK

This will help you to keep a clear audit trail and assist you when preparing your tax return. It is important that you are able to demonstrate that you are using the computer for business purposes and there is not a significant element of private use. If there is, then tax relief should be restricted.

If you are going to have rant when your attitude to your company finances is so flippant at least try a bit harder to make it a good one. Remember the ones that actually agree with you aren't going to be stupid enough to do it on an internet forum.

[cojak]

It was under HMRC Scheme Enquiries on my tablet yesterday? Must have been moved in the meantime.

Yes, and the question has nothing to do with HMRC Scheme Enquiries, it is an accounting question. I moved it to ensure accountants answer it.