Changing personal mobile phone account to be in the name of my company

[SueEllen]

Having read this thread, it'd be quicker just to get a phone personally and pay for it personally or is there a massive a tax saving to be had that I'm not noticing?

It would be for the OP.

The rest of us can sort out whether we get a business or personal contract paying from the respective accounts without starting a thread.

[dwater]

This!!

I think people would be very surprised on how little all this actually saves on a basic contract for the hassle. Anyone thinking it's free because the company is paying for it is gonna have to go re-visit and understand their finances better.

I find this interesting. I accept that there is perhaps little value in terms of VAT saving, but is it not true that we should basically think in terms of how real businesses operate and try do the same thing? By 'real businesses', I mean those for whom I've worked previously. With them, if I needed a phone for business purposes, I would insist they provide it; or if I were to provide it, then I would expense the cost to them. I would also be allowed to use it for reasonable personal use (and on some occasions, some unreasonable use too!*). As such, I have been considering doing the same.

I want to get a separate number/sim for the business (payg, perhaps), buy a new dual-sim phone owned by the business (or sell my own one to the business) - dual-sim so I can use it with my personal sim too. This way, I can essentially turn off the agent calls when I'm in a long term contract (if I actually manage to get one) and still receive personal calls. I'd continue to get personal calls, and such, of course, using my personal sim.

I guess I could write off the value of the phone over time (well, my accountant could) to help with an upgrade when the time comes...some phones are quite expensive**.

There's also the angle that I would more than likely be doing development on the phone, which, of course, requires a sim to get the full experience.

...but, yeah, I don't really know what I'm talking about, but those are where my thoughts are. Is there anything in there that is valid, or it is all just not worth the hassle, and the value only comes from having a large(r) number of employees, or is it purely just some kind of employee benefit?

TBH, I get the impression my accountant doesn't want to bother with any tax claims and just go for some plan where they tax a fixed rate, presuming you aren't going to have much in the way of business expenses to reclaim tax on.

John.

* Bill shock when roaming to the tune of a few K of Euros (thanks to Nokia for covering the cost).
** I'd probably get a good value one though, like a Wileyfox.

[TheCyclingProgrammer]

Remember, regardless of whether you have a business or personal contract YourCo can still buy the phone which can save you CT and VAT too if you're not on the FRS or it's part of a larger purchase.

[gables]

It is quicker to visit the entire UK branch network than to deal with EE over the phone.

It would be for the OP. accounts without starting a thread.

Yes, indeed that's why my post was a little tongue in cheek.

I find this interesting. I accept that there is perhaps little value in terms of VAT saving, but is it not true that we should basically think in terms of how real businesses operate and try do

The rest of us can sort out whether we get a business or personal contract paying from the respective the same thing? By 'real businesses', I mean those for whom I've worked previously. With them, if I needed a phone for business purposes, I would insist they provide it; or if I were to provide it, then I would expense the cost to them. I would also be allowed to use it for reasonable personal use (and on some occasions, some unreasonable use too!*). As such, I have been considering doing the same.

I want to get a separate number/sim for the business (payg, perhaps), buy a new dual-sim phone owned by the business (or sell my own one to the business) - dual-sim so I can use it with my personal sim too. This way, I can essentially turn off the agent calls when I'm in a long term contract (if I actually manage to get one) and still receive personal calls. I'd continue to get personal calls, and such, of course, using my personal sim.

I guess I could write off the value of the phone over time (well, my accountant could) to help with an upgrade when the time comes...some phones are quite expensive**.

There's also the angle that I would more than likely be doing development on the phone, which, of course, requires a sim to get the full experience.

...but, yeah, I don't really know what I'm talking about, but those are where my thoughts are. Is there anything in there that is valid, or it is all just not worth the hassle, and the value only comes from having a large(r) number of employees, or is it purely just some kind of employee benefit?

TBH, I get the impression my accountant doesn't want to bother with any tax claims and just go for some plan where they tax a fixed rate, presuming you aren't going to have much in the way of business expenses to reclaim tax on.

John.

* Bill shock when roaming to the tune of a few K of Euros (thanks to Nokia for covering the cost).
** I'd probably get a good value one though, like a Wileyfox.

I can see why you might want a separate number, and as the post above shows the company can buy it (I buy ink through the company). But, to me, if something is looking like it's going to longer\is a pain in the neck, the tax saving etc usually (for me) not worth it. For the same reason I don't 'claim' lunches, just not worth the effort imho.

[northernladuk]

I guess I could write off the value of the phone over time (well, my accountant could) to help with an upgrade when the time comes...some phones are quite expensive**.

You guess???!?!?

There's also the angle that I would more than likely be doing development on the phone, which, of course, requires a sim to get the full experience.

Only if you are developing mobile apps. If that is what you do then yes but not sure what difference it makes.

...but, yeah, I don't really know what I'm talking about, but those are where my thoughts are. Is there anything in there that is valid, or it is all just not worth the hassle, and the value only comes from having a large(r) number of employees, or is it purely just some kind of employee benefit?

Wouldn't it be a good idea to ask your accountant and do some research rather than post a brain fart that everyone else has to pick apart for you?

You actually quoted my statement so many follow it's advice? 'Anyone thinking it's free because the company is paying for it is gonna have to go re-visit and understand their finances better.'

[booms]

[QUOTE=missinggreenfields;2324600]The exact wording is "No liability to income tax arises by virtue of Chapter 10 of Part 3 (taxable benefits: residual liability to charge) in respect of the provision for an employee or a member of the employee’s family or household of a mobile telephone without any transfer of property in it." (ITEPA 2003, s319)

Hi folks,

So looking at the legislation that was kindly linked by missinggreenfields

Income Tax (Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003

319 Mobile telephones
(1)No liability to income tax arises by virtue of Chapter 10 of Part 3 (taxable benefits: residual liability to charge) in respect of the provision for an employee or a member of the employee’s family or household of a mobile telephone without any transfer of property in it.

I suspect when they say ‘transfer of property’ they’re saying that the mobile phone needs to remain, legally and in substance, the property of the employer, which I suppose is fair enough.

Is there any other guidance on this though? I see this is from ITEPA 2003 – did someone say the guidance had been updated much more recently?

In case it’s useful for anyone, I gave Three a call as the plans aren’t detailed on their website, and had the strange experience of being talked out of buying a product by the salesperson. They really don’t seem very keen. Anyway, they seem to only offer two contracts, Business 600 and Business 900. Both have more minutes and texts than I’d ever use, but the first is 1GB only, the other is unlimited. The first is £8.44+VAT/month, the latter £17.29+VAT/month. They weren’t interested in negotiating, and they’d need 3 months of company bank statements which I don’t yet have.

By the way – my accountants aren’t ‘CK’. I got them off a recommendation on this forum.

Also, I can’t find anything specifying whether HMRC cares about personal vs business accounts – is that defined anywhere?

[northernladuk]

Hi folks,

So looking at the legislation that was kindly linked by missinggreenfields

Income Tax (Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003

319 Mobile telephones
(1)No liability to income tax arises by virtue of Chapter 10 of Part 3 (taxable benefits: residual liability to charge) in respect of the provision for an employee or a member of the employee’s family or household of a mobile telephone without any transfer of property in it.

I suspect when they say ‘transfer of property’ they’re saying that the mobile phone needs to remain, legally and in substance, the property of the employer, which I suppose is fair enough.

Is there any other guidance on this though? I see this is from ITEPA 2003 – did someone say the guidance had been updated much more recently?

In case it’s useful for anyone, I gave Three a call as the plans aren’t detailed on their website, and had the strange experience of being talked out of buying a product by the salesperson. They really don’t seem very keen. Anyway, they seem to only offer two contracts, Business 600 and Business 900. Both have more minutes and texts than I’d ever use, but the first is 1GB only, the other is unlimited. The first is £8.44+VAT/month, the latter £17.29+VAT/month. They weren’t interested in negotiating, and they’d need 3 months of company bank statements which I don’t yet have.

By the way – my accountants aren’t ‘CK’. I got them off a recommendation on this forum.

Also, I can’t find anything specifying whether HMRC cares about personal vs business accounts – is that defined anywhere?

Not sure about it being specified but the ownership is pretty fundament. I am guessing a lot of the articles assume you understand the ownership issue before going in to the detail. That ownership detail would be to be a business asset it has to be paid for by the business and in the business name.

The first page of this link https://www.gov.uk/expenses-and-bene...hones/overview says...

As an employer providing mobile phones to your employees, you have certain tax, National Insurance and reporting obligations.

This includes:
costs for phones you provide to employees
reimbursing your employee’s own phone costs

It has to be the company property, paid for and owned before you can even start. I'd say they are assuming you know the basics when starting out, not having to explain the whole ownership again.

Bearing in mind nearly all the advice on here and from the accountants on the whole is to have the contract with the company paid by the company why are you expending so much effort to try get around it?

And to mention it again. Do you realise how much you are actually saving putting a £20 contract a month through the company? I just wouldn't bother.

[DSF70]

If the phone is in the company name, you might want to consider insuring it too, as it's unlikely to be covered under any home contents and oersonal possessions policy.

On an aside, I've just set up with Hiscox through the CUK link. I wasn't aware that even if I never take my company laptop out of my office (at home), that a laptop is classed as a portable device and therefore needs a portable possessions addition to the policy, not just under the standard office (static) equipment part if the policy.

[TheCyclingProgrammer]

If the phone is in the company name, you might want to consider insuring it too, as it's unlikely to be covered under any home contents and oersonal possessions policy.

Not necessarily. I have covered my company owned phone on a personal contents insurance policy before after confirming with the insurer that they would cover any items that I have legal responsibility for (which included any business equipment in my sole possession subject to any limits on the policy). I always had my laptop and phone as named items.

My phone these days is covered by my business insurance although annoyingly my insurer, Direct Line, only cover up to £500 per mobile phone, so I would still try and claim against my home insurance if possible (phone cost £700).

On an aside, I've just set up with Hiscox through the CUK link. I wasn't aware that even if I never take my company laptop out of my office (at home), that a laptop is classed as a portable device and therefore needs a portable possessions addition to the policy, not just under the standard office (static) equipment part if the policy.

Same with Direct Line.

[Spoiler]

I've recently moved my EE sim only contract from a personal account into my LTD.

Easy enough - just had to fill out an email and supply supporting document. All done in 7 days