Pluralsight Subscription - Expensable?

[Big Blue Plymouth]

It would go under training costs.

Whether or not training can be expensed has been debated on here a lot but IMO if the subscription to Pluralsight gives you effectively unlimited access to training on a number of subjects including those which do not cover your current trade then there may be an element of BIK payable on the subscription.

Of course you could just stick it through if you feel you can justify the company paying for it to HMRC.

Yes, this was my thought.

I will put it through anyway. Thank you.

[blackeye]

What about something quite broad (compared to professional training courses), that could potentially increase the likelihood for the company to get work. I.e. an MBA?

[malvolio]

What about something quite broad (compared to professional training courses), that could potentially increase the likelihood for the company to get work. I.e. an MBA?

Nope. An MBA is ussd as a specific example of what's not allowed since it is essentially a general qualification

[itjobs]

... but IMO if the subscription to Pluralsight gives you effectively unlimited access to training on a number of subjects including those which do not cover your current trade then there may be an element of BIK payable on the subscription
...

As a Director of the company it would be illogical to pay £x for just a couple of online courses when you can get more for the same £x. Therefore BIK is not applicable here.

[malvolio]

As a Director of the company it would be illogical to pay £x for just a couple of online courses when you can get more for the same £x. Therefore BIK is not applicable here.

You do understand what BIK means I take it...?

[TheCyclingProgrammer]

As a Director of the company it would be illogical to pay £x for just a couple of online courses when you can get more for the same £x. Therefore BIK is not applicable here.

Hard to see how an ongoing subscription for a service that provides training on a wide range of subjects would not be a BIK. The benefit being, of course, the ability to make full use of the service even if some courses are of no relevance to your job.

The only way I think it could work is if you subscribed to access a specific course, kept records of your studies and then terminated the subscription once the course was complete on the basis that doing it that way was cheaper. However you would still need to demonstrate it was necessary to do your job for it to not be a BIK.

[Ebenezer]

Hard to see how an ongoing subscription for a service that provides training on a wide range of subjects would not be a BIK. The benefit being, of course, the ability to make full use of the service even if some courses are of no relevance to your job.

The only way I think it could work is if you subscribed to access a specific course, kept records of your studies and then terminated the subscription once the course was complete on the basis that doing it that way was cheaper. However you would still need to demonstrate it was necessary to do your job for it to not be a BIK.

Not too sure about this; loads of companies, both consultancies and those that do "real work", pay for Pluralsight etc. for their employees without worrying too much about it.

I don't have Pluralsight at the moment, but I do pay for O'Reilly books online (to which I have also had a corporate subscription when I was a permie in the past), and put this through the company without giving it a second thought.

It's difficult to imagine Hector wanting to argue about the relevance or otherwise of the content in these subscriptions, especially given the small amounts of money involved; my bill from Safari wouldn't even cover the appetisers at the annual board meeting in Cancun, for instance.

[missinggreenfields]

Not too sure about this; loads of companies, both consultancies and those that do "real work", pay for Pluralsight etc. for their employees without worrying too much about it.

But those companies already have the work, they are skilling people up to meet that existing pipeline of work and is therefore an allowable expense.

[TheCyclingProgrammer]

Not too sure about this; loads of companies, both consultancies and those that do "real work", pay for Pluralsight etc. for their employees without worrying too much about it.

I don't have Pluralsight at the moment, but I do pay for O'Reilly books online (to which I have also had a corporate subscription when I was a permie in the past), and put this through the company without giving it a second thought.

It's difficult to imagine Hector wanting to argue about the relevance or otherwise of the content in these subscriptions, especially given the small amounts of money involved; my bill from Safari wouldn't even cover the appetisers at the annual board meeting in Cancun, for instance.

As I said before if you think you can make a fair argument for the subscription being wholly, exclusively and necessary for your job then put it through the company.

It's not a black or white issue. If you're using it for stuff related to your job and in the event of a compliance check can demonstrate that to HMIT then you're right, I can't see much of a fuss being made about it.

The definition of work related training (which is generally exempt) is here:

https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-man...anual/eim01220