24 month rule - This is different!

[northernladuk]

Same with IR35 of course. You might think you've got the most watertight IR35 gig in the world but if HMRC decided otherwise its a whole lot of pain....

So do we all declare ourselves inside IR35 just in case?

I was actually agreeing with you when I posted that.

But... Comparing Ir35 doesn't work. The two situations are far too different to us as a useful comparison.

[missinggreenfields]

My price, for that service, would be a he'll of a lot more than £2K, ah sorry, in your case, £1K .
Point is, do you really need to squabble for these additional pennies, or are you being plain greedy?

A few years ago, my travel expenses were £20k for the year. I'm interested in seeing what expert advice is being given, because while it won't effect me now, it probably will in the future.

If I was in the same situation as this guy, I'd be claiming it and arguing that there was never an expectation for the location to be anything other than temporary - there as a significant break in the middle, so I'd argue that there was no continuous work going on in that location.

Personally, even if it was "only" £1k in expenses, I'd want to claim it if it was a reasonable expense.

[northernladuk]

Personally, even if it was "only" £1k in expenses, I'd want to claim it if it was a reasonable expense

But that is the keyword. He's in a situation where he's getting different answers from different groups with the overarching message from his accountant to pay it back. He's then go to great lengths to find out about the penalties if he gets found out and whether he'll get picked for IR35, which he's admitted he seriously doesn't want to. Apart from the penalties he's had no concrete answer.

You could very easily argue this is no longer a 'reasonable' expense with a massive cost should the risk be realised all for 1k which am still not convinced this is the actual amount in the long run.

He's paid well and for most of his contracting career will claim travelling expenses amounting to 10's of K etc. It's peanuts in the long run. Think about it that way instead to try lessen the hurt?

That said this thread has boiled down to nothing more than how much 1k is worth to you and what your risk profile is. We've all got different ones so really down to the OP to make a decision go with it and getting on with something else to moan about. Life is too short.

[northernladuk]

Oh and IMO knowing the OP there isn't a snowballs chance in hell the OP is going to pay it back so not really sure why the thread is still going TBH.

[missinggreenfields]

But that is the keyword. He's in a situation where he's getting different answers from different groups with the overarching message from his accountant to pay it back. He's then go to great lengths to find out about the penalties if he gets found out and whether he'll get picked for IR35, which he's admitted he seriously doesn't want to. Apart from the penalties he's had no concrete answer.

You could very easily argue this is no longer a 'reasonable' expense with a massive cost should the risk be realised all for 1k which am still not convinced this is the actual amount in the long run.

He's paid well and for most of his contracting career will claim travelling expenses amounting to 10's of K etc. It's peanuts in the long run. Think about it that way instead to try lessen the hurt?

That said this thread has boiled down to nothing more than how much 1k is worth to you and what your risk profile is. We've all got different ones so really down to the OP to make a decision go with it and getting on with something else to moan about. Life is too short.

Imagine for one second that the poster was someone different. Someone you generally respect. Someone who you obviously don't have such an intense dislike of. I'm sure there must be at least one person that you can think of.

Then imagine that the expense level isn't £1k - it's £30k of travel and subsistence over the course of the year. The difference now is that if the cost isn't a business expense, you have to pay it yourself - and pay the PAYE and NI that that attracts. So that makes the contract not worth taking any more, because to cover that you need a massive hike in the day rate.

In that situation, the only thing from your post that is really worthwhile is "there is no concrete answer". He's taken professional advice, from the people that would be defending him in a tax investigation (I guess - I don't know what IPSE would cover). He's asked different people in different places - some would see that as trying to get as many viewpoints as possible; some would see that as trying your luck instead of listening to you on here.

Maybe pretend it's not someone you clearly dislike, and it's a bigger sum - getting any form of clarity in this uncertainty should be welcomed rather than belittled.

But as you say - there is no concrete answer.

[northernladuk]

Imagine for one second that the poster was someone different. Someone you generally respect. Someone who you obviously don't have such an intense dislike of. I'm sure there must be at least one person that you can think of.

Erm. Nope. Sorry.

Then imagine that the expense level isn't £1k - it's £30k of travel and subsistence over the course of the year. The difference now is that if the cost isn't a business expense, you have to pay it yourself - and pay the PAYE and NI that that attracts. So that makes the contract not worth taking any more, because to cover that you need a massive hike in the day rate.

I get what you are saying but that's moving the goal posts too far. The fact of the matter is its 1k. Can't get away from that as that the basis of my argument.

In that situation, the only thing from your post that is really worthwhile is "there is no concrete answer". He's taken professional advice, from the people that would be defending him in a tax investigation (I guess - I don't know what IPSE would cover). He's asked different people in different places - some would see that as trying to get as many viewpoints as possible; some would see that as trying your luck instead of listening to you on here.

Yep I get you again. There is a fine line between seeking opinions and desperately looking for the answer he wants but you are right. The knowledge of the OP is clouding that one. Remember I'm not the only one thats said the same thing TBH. Matters not but thought I would point that out.

Maybe pretend it's not someone you clearly dislike, and it's a bigger sum - getting any form of clarity in this uncertainty should be welcomed rather than belittled.

But as you say - there is no concrete answer.

Indeed. This is PC and the thread has turned into another PC life blog of which many of us are sadly aware. You're quite new so have a proper perspective on the situation to be fair to all good points

Am sure whatever infraction the mods will bestow upon me for not putting him on ignore again will remind me.

[SlipTheJab]

FFS PC If we all club together with our loose change and get you your 2k will you let this thread die!?

[missinggreenfields]

I get what you are saying but that's moving the goal posts too far. The fact of the matter is its 1k. Can't get away from that as that the basis of my argument.

But that's where your argument falls down, in my eyes.

You're saying "it's such a paltry amount, then why bother", whereas I'm saying "if this is a legitimate expense then I'd rather have £1000 in my pocket than not thank you very much". I don't care whether it's £1k, £10k, £30k - it's better off in my pocket rather than the government. Assuming it's a legitimate expense.

For me, my travel expenses are usually high - so having an answer is good. If that's an answer that I like, then great; if it's not then I need to reconsider where I work and what I charge. But either way, I like the fact that someone has taken professional advice and shared it.

There's no definite answer without court cases, but to say "it's only £1000 so why bother" seems a silly argument in my eyes.

[sociopath]

What is the general consensus of all the accountants that post on here? What are their professional opinions? What would they recommend to their clients?

[northernladuk]

But that's where your argument falls down, in my eyes.

You're saying "it's such a paltry amount, then why bother", whereas I'm saying "if this is a legitimate expense then I'd rather have £1000 in my pocket than not thank you very much". I don't care whether it's £1k, £10k, £30k - it's better off in my pocket rather than the government. Assuming it's a legitimate expense.

For me, my travel expenses are usually high - so having an answer is good. If that's an answer that I like, then great; if it's not then I need to reconsider where I work and what I charge. But either way, I like the fact that someone has taken professional advice and shared it.

There's no definite answer without court cases, but to say "it's only £1000 so why bother" seems a silly argument in my eyes.

Again I agree. It again I'd argue the term legitimate. But we are on the same page'ish so no point going over it again. In theory I agree.