Training and tax position

[tractor]

.....

Why? The very first thread on that search answers this question exactly.

There is also a post by Wanderer in there linking the HMRC guidance which is pretty clear. Something no one has bothered to do in this thread because we are a bit tired of it and it's already out there. People asking the same questions doesn't always fresh anything, it adds more threads that are not completely answered because it's been done.

And it's not picking on them. By learning how to do the search the OP now has absolutely everything he needs to know. He can do the search and answer the R&D question he asked and anything else that comes to mind without having to spend time posting and waiting until he get's the response he wants. I know it pisses you off but it is actually in the OP's best interest to learn how to use the search. He asks a question and get's 10 response in one thread. He learns to use the search he has 96K threads of information at his finger tips.

It doesn't always piss me off, just sometimes. I too have issues with the search, it helps if you know exactly what you are looking for but that is half the problem, people often don't.

You are not risking your livelihood, you are just not saving 20 whole massive percent on it. If you can make money out of it then you pay it yourself as an investment. Don't let the tax tail wag the business dog.

This I agree with entirely. Too many people (not saying it's true in this case) think that being in business is all about what you can get away with. That is NOT professional. That attitude has gone a long way to getting IT contractors put in the same boat as cowboy builders by the government and HMRC - for those who remember the 'Make hay while the sun shines' article that so enthused Primarolo and her cronies.

[Unix]

Then you are committing tax evasion; the rule is not woolly, it's very clearly stated. To meet your stated requirement, the training is not tax deductible (I assume you understand the difference between business cost and BIK...)

No that's why I pay my accountant to take care of this. I put everything I can through the company, it's one of the perks of being a contractor with a Ltd company for me. If HMRC can prove it's not 100% for the company then I will pay back the difference.

[Unix]

Why? The very first thread on that search answers this question exactly.

There is also a post by Wanderer in there linking the HMRC guidance which is pretty clear. Something no one has bothered to do in this thread because we are a bit tired of it and it's already out there. People asking the same questions doesn't always fresh anything, it adds more threads that are not completely answered because it's been done.

And it's not picking on them. By learning how to do the search the OP now has absolutely everything he needs to know. He can do the search and answer the R&D question he asked and anything else that comes to mind without having to spend time posting and waiting until he get's the response he wants. I know it pisses you off but it is actually in the OP's best interest to learn how to use the search. He asks a question and get's 10 response in one thread. He learns to use the search he has 96K threads of information at his finger tips.

I would agree if the search was any good, for example it doesn't allow 3 letter words etc, useless.

[tractor]

...

I would agree if the search was any good, for example it doesn't allow 3 letter words etc, useless.

Given that our world is populated mainly by TLAs, allowing 3 letter searches would be a good idea

[northernladuk]

I would agree if the search was any good, for example it doesn't allow 3 letter words etc, useless.

And so ends lesson one in how to look like a complete ******* moron on an internet forum

[tractor]

.

And so ends lesson one in how to look like a complete ******* moron on an internet forum

Unix, me, you or everyone?

Can you tell us how to do a search for 'TLA' on a forum that does not allow 3 letter searches?

[monoceros]

... Too many people (not saying it's true in this case) think that being in business is all about what you can get away with.

Certainly not the case ;-)

My main reason for my confusion is really this as it seems the situation is:

- YourComp blags its way into a contract that needs a skill it does not have: YourComp can claim back the training costs.
- YourComp wants to establish the skills first so it can generate business: YourComp cannot claim back the training costs.

... and this just seems wrong.

I can understand that there must be some way to prove business need - otherwise I will be on a 6 month intensive scuba diving and chocolate appreciation course - but why can that not be retrospective? YourComp pays £10k for training, if in the next *some suitable period* YourComp can prove it did have a business justification by showing revenue tied to the training then why is it not clear that it was directly related to the business? If YourComp cannot prove this then the investment is lost.

[stek]

Anyone that didn't bother to bloody read my posts which should send you to the FAQ page where the method of searching is explained in detail which does allow 3 letter searches.

You mean TLS? Three Letter Searching?

[northernladuk]

Unix, me, you or everyone?

Can you tell us how to do a search for 'TLA' on a forum that does not allow 3 letter searches?

Like typing this in to google?
TLA site:forums.contractoruk.com

[stek]

I suppose then that by dint all investment through ones limited in a Plan B is tax evasion too?