2nd hand motorcycle

[northernladuk]

Why does some other business get to have a company vehicle but if I do it am a bad guy?

I think you are probably comparing apples with pears. Most business offer company cars as a perk (even though it usually isn't nowadays). The cars are leased and it's usually not very efficient for the employees. They just get to drive around in a new car they wouldn't normally be able to afford. You are looking to buy a vehicle to use the tax efficiencies you think might be there. Whole different set up.

[mgrover]

I think you are probably comparing apples with pears. Most business offer company cars as a perk (even though it usually isn't nowadays). The cars are leased and it's usually not very efficient for the employees. They just get to drive around in a new car they wouldn't normally be able to afford. You are looking to buy a vehicle to use the tax efficiencies you think might be there. Whole different set up.

Depends, perm employed friend gets a company car, everything is paid for, all he has to pay is the BIK which is like 200 for the year or something equally low. Its very efficient for him given he doesn't need to pay for the car, maintenance, tax, insurance etc etc.

I've already bought the vehicle, am just trying to decide whether it'd be more tax efficient if the company owned the car or I claim mileage.

[mgrover]

The clue was in the third paragraph. Or to put it another way, because you can doesn't mean you should.

Am still confused, it's part of the tax code. If I am a legitimate company why wouldn't I be able to leverage it as every other company does? If your a disguised employee then yes you deserve to fall under IR35 and have to pay up the taxes. But other than that like I said why am I a bad guy for using the perks of the tax code?

[northernladuk]

Depends, perm employed friend gets a company car, everything is paid for, all he has to pay is the BIK which is like 200 for the year or something equally low. Its very efficient for him given he doesn't need to pay for the car, maintenance, tax, insurance etc etc.

I've already bought the vehicle, am just trying to decide whether it'd be more tax efficient if the company owned the car or I claim mileage.

Unless your friend is in a pretty unique situation I very much doubt that. I think you'll also find it's a company car allowance where he'd get three or four hundred quid a month if he didn't take the car option. From what I remember and chatting to people there is always a cash option.

The general answer to all these company vehicle questions is that is most likely to most efficient by just claiming the miles. We've had a couple of people investigating electric cars at the moment but to date no one example thrown up has resulted in advice saying a company vehicle is worth it. If it were we'd all be doing it.

[malvolio]

Am still confused, it's part of the tax code. If I am a legitimate company why wouldn't I be able to leverage it as every other company does? If your a disguised employee then yes you deserve to fall under IR35 and have to pay up the taxes. But other than that like I said why am I a bad guy for using the perks of the tax code?

Legally, nothing at all. Politically, it's potentially very damaging. Depends really on how you view the various challenges aimed at contractors by HMG (or to be more precise, the senior Civil Servants in the Treasury mainly and assorted misguided and badly informed politicians) and the way in which the average employee sees our position. They don't care about the serious money we do generate for the economy - about £240bn a year - only trivia such as we can claim personal transport to get to work when they can't.

[mgrover]

Unless your friend is in a pretty unique situation I very much doubt that. I think you'll also find it's a company car allowance where he'd get three or four hundred quid a month if he didn't take the car option. From what I remember and chatting to people there is always a cash option.

The general answer to all these company vehicle questions is that is most likely to most efficient by just claiming the miles. We've had a couple of people investigating electric cars at the moment but to date no one example thrown up has resulted in advice saying a company vehicle is worth it. If it were we'd all be doing it.

I guess it depends on the mileage, but yeah i think they gave him a company car because otherwise he'd be doing 24k a year on his celica and claiming mileage.

[northernladuk]

I guess it depends on the mileage, but yeah i think they gave him a company car because otherwise he'd be doing 24k a year on his celica and claiming mileage.

I'd be snapping their hands off to do that. and make a pretty nice penny from it. The approved mileage rates take in to account wear and tear, repairs etc. For a cheap old car you can make a profit on it.

As I say, they won't be 'giving' him it. He'll be paying for it out of his gross somewhere.

Back in the day a small company I worked at had a higher band for 3L+ cars. 62p a mile I think it was. I could have sacrificed £250 for a company car but instead bought an old Supra for 2k. I was travelling from Manchester to Halesowen and Surrey three times a week. I made a bloody fortune from it. 250 quid just for driving to Surrey and back. Was regularly making between 500 and 750+ a week...... to the point they got so they got pissed off and dropped the 62p band.

[mgrover]

Legally, nothing at all. Politically, it's potentially very damaging. Depends really on how you view the various challenges aimed at contractors by HMG (or to be more precise, the senior Civil Servants in the Treasury mainly and assorted misguided and badly informed politicians) and the way in which the average employee sees our position. They don't care about the serious money we do generate for the economy - about £240bn a year - only trivia such as we can claim personal transport to get to work when they can't.

Then it seems we should all kowtow with our tails between our legs and not use any of the advantages of a limited company. No dividends or anything as such and instead basically only take money via PAYE.

[malvolio]

Then it seems we should all kowtow with our tails between our legs and not use any of the advantages of a limited company. No dividends or anything as such and instead basically only take money via PAYE.

No, not at all.

If you want to persuade HMG to take our case seriously, not taking the p*ss over trivia is a good start. Sadly, like you, 90% of contractors fail to understand the point.

HTH. BIDI.

[mgrover]

No, not at all.

If you want to persuade HMG to take our case seriously, not taking the p*ss over trivia is a good start. Sadly, like you, 90% of contractors fail to understand the point.

HTH. BIDI.

Well am not here to persuade HMG am I?

It's very simple, your either a legitimate business or your taking the piss. As one or the other you fall into certain rules.

Since I know my company is a legitimate business I don't worry about how HMRC and HMG are going to perceive anything because I know what I am doing is within the confines of the law for a business. Even with the IR35 changes that were coming into place.

Now if you want to argue that I am inside IR35 that's a different matter, you'll be wrong but at least you'll be making the appropriate argument.