Client ANPR cannot read my number plate. New one as an expense?

[northernladuk]

Well according to the nice letter the local council down here sent me last week regarding alleged jaunt down a bus lane, other ANPR's can pick it out without a problem

Hmm.. I wonder if the company can pay that....

[barrydidit]

Obviously, you need a new car.

[chopper]

[FrontEnder]

So my new clients site ANPR cannot read my number plate properly causing delays coming on to site in a morning which is a tad embarrassing as it's very busy. I am assuming the fact the change is wholly and exclusively for the purpose of getting on my clients site it's a valid expense?

Discuss.....

It's available for use at other times, so not wholly and exclusively.

If you change the plates just before the car park entrance and then put the old ones back as soon as you leave, you should be ok mate.

[Lance]

What did your accountant say?

(Vehicle maintenance, innit? Which is rolled up into your 45p per mile).

This^^^

[northernladuk]

It's available for use at other times, so not wholly and exclusively.

If you change the plates just before the car park entrance and then put the old ones back as soon as you leave, you should be ok mate.

Excellent.. So I need one of these then...Well.. The company does.

[TheCyclingProgrammer]

It's available for use at other times, so not wholly and exclusively.

If you change the plates just before the car park entrance and then put the old ones back as soon as you leave, you should be ok mate.

I'm pretty sure NLUK is on a windup but...

Is wholly and exclusively for business "purposes", not "use". If there is only a business purpose for an asset made available to an employee then any non-business use will normally be treated as not significant.

Whether you can convince HMRC there was no other purpose is of course another story and some things (like most clothing) are treated as having inherent dual purpose regardless.

[northernladuk]

I'm pretty sure NLUK is on a windup but...

Is wholly and exclusively for business "purposes", not "use". If there is only a business purpose for an asset made available to an employee then any non-business use will normally be treated as not significant.

Whether you can convince HMRC there was no other purpose is of course another story and some things (like most clothing) are treated as having inherent dual purpose regardless.

Well.. Ish.. I am genuinely having problems with the ANPR's so thought it would be an interesting point to discuss and useful for future posters to discuss then intricacies of the rule. Bit like my poker losses question awhile ago.

It's a little tongue in cheek but not as far off the mark as some posters genuine questions.

[SueEllen]

Well.. Ish.. I am genuinely having problems with the ANPR's so thought it would be an interesting point to discuss and useful for future posters to discuss then intricacies of the rule. Bit like my poker losses question awhile ago.

It's a little tongue in cheek but not as far off the mark as some posters genuine questions.

Just get in 10 minutes earlier or buy it out of the 45ppm.

[Yorkie62]

Many cannot recognise when it's split across two rows, which is the main reason that the congestion charge won't apply to motorbikes, no matter how environmentally unfriendly they may be.

Motorbike's are not environmentally unfriendly. If the same rules that apply to car road fund licence were applied to motorbikes, I would pay £0 per year rather than the current £82. On the plus side neither of my Triumph GT6's require road fund licence under the historic vehicle rules, nor are they environmentally friendly