Satellite Navigation

[Jason D]

Satnav

No I certainly wouldn't recommend not putting through a legitimate expense for fear of having to justify it.

In this case however, it would only be legitimate if you took the very odd decision of not using a SatNav personally because you don't mind being late/getting lost in your own time.

Even if this were true, I don't think anyone would believe it.

Re the necessary test, caselaw precedent shows this to be a very onerous one and again I don't think your argument would hold water.

Good luck though!

Not wanting to be a last word freak or anything but why is that odd?!!

I don't like lateness in business and will not tolerate it, if I hired you to do my accounts and you arrived at the first meeting late there is no way that I would engage you. If you could not arrive to an important meeting with a prospective client on time then what else would be late? That would be my mindset and I would expect some, not all but some, clients to think it a similar way. I therefore always use the Satnav to maximise my chances of getting to a new clients premises on time.

Whether you believe it is neither here nor there but I do place extra emphasis on business meetings than personal and I have never used it for personal use.

Even if I did, if the personal use was incidental then it's still allowable.

[THEPUMA]

Not wanting to be a last word freak or anything but why is that odd?!!

I don't like lateness in business and will not tolerate it, if I hired you to do my accounts and you arrived at the first meeting late there is no way that I would engage you. If you could not arrive to an important meeting with a prospective client on time then what else would be late? That would be my mindset and I would expect some, not all but some, clients to think it a similar way. I therefore always use the Satnav to maximise my chances of getting to a new clients premises on time.

Whether you believe it is neither here nor there but I do place extra emphasis on business meetings than personal and I have never used it for personal use.

Even if I did, if the personal use was incidental then it's still allowable.

I think it is odd that you would own a SatNav system but never use it personally. What is the logical reason? Let's say, for example, that you are going to a wedding and don't know the way, why wouldn't you use the SatNav?

Point accepted re incidental use.

[Jason D]

I think it is odd that you would own a SatNav system but never use it personally. What is the logical reason? Let's say, for example, that you are going to a wedding and don't know the way, why wouldn't you use the SatNav?

Point accepted re incidental use.

I suppose it stems from that personally I nearly always know where I am going, and if something comes up like a wedding then my wife always has her pre planned AA route printed out which she swears by. She does like a bit of control freakery and if I were to tell her to bin the print out and go with the Satnav it would not be worth the pain.

Simple truth is that 99% of the occasions where I need to take a trip to unknown territory is business related, as im sure is the case for others and if so i'd always recommend to put them through purely for the fact that I dont like HMRC having money which they are not entitled to, it ruins my sleep.

People should get into the mindset of putting all allowable expenses through, far too many don't and pay more tax than they neded to, im not advocating putting items through which you shouldn't, but everything that you should.

Appreciate that this situation is a grey one on which each case is on its merits but would not advise people not to put them through as a general statement.

It's a bit like the lower wage -v- NMW argument on another thread, two schools of thought and who is to say who is right or wrong.

*Lower wage

[IR35 Avoider]

Buy a PDA with inbuilt Sat Nav, or even a Nokia N95.

Much easier to justify an organizer or a phone!

I have a PDA with TomTom installed, however I'm thinking of scrapping it in favour of a dedicated device. The problem is, a PDA battery goes flat within a few days, so if I kept it in the car (and assuming I didn't plug it in to use it on a daily basis) I would have to reinstall the software or restore from a backup every time I wanted to use it. (Software install places important files in volatile PDA memory.)

Even if I did carry my PDA with me, it would be in the boot in my briefcase rather than next to me in the car, when I hit a traffic jam and suddenly needed to navigate my way around it. Based on my Sat Nav actual usage, I would have to re-charge the PDA far more often than I actually used it, even if I could remember to do so on a regular basis.

So my PDA sits in the cradle at home, and I only use Sat Nav once every few months on journeys where I know in advance I'm going to need it.

A mobile phone is a better idea, if you actually use one daily and keep it charged anyway. Mine is kept switched off in my car, which is the only place I use it.

I would go for a dedicated device.

[chubba]

My old PDA with TomTom (all paid for by the business) several years ago died a few days ago en route to a client. I stopped in the nearest shop and bought a dedicated unit (TomTom Go 710) and am really impressed by it, would highly recommend. It was £300 but I feel it is a justified business expense as time is money, takes me longer to find places with maps, the client was in central London and would be a pain in the arse to find with maps. I never used the PDA for personal use and will not use the dedicated for personal use.

THEPUMA, in what role do you make all of these observations regarding test cases etc? Are you an accountant or lawyer or something?

You sound paranoid enough to be one!

I work from home and have bought a laptop which is used for the company. Should I live in fear of an investigation in case they challenge this too?

How far can these things be taken? How can HMRC prove that something has been used personally. Basically they would be calling me a liar if I told them I had never used something for personal rather than business use. Are we not innocent until proven guilty?

[Maxamus]

i bought mine for the car for £419. I understand that there will be some personal use so for that reason i am only going to claim £250. This should satisfy gordo......

[philip@wellwoodhoyle]

how can it possibly be "necessary"?

Doesn't need to be "necessary" - Just buy it through the company rather than buying it personally and claiming it on your expenses.

The test is "wholly and exclusively" if bought directly by the business BUT

"wholly, exclusively and necessarily" if claimed by the director under the old schedule E rules.

So buy anything like this directly through the company, company pays and gets an invoice in the company name, and you don't have to think about "necessarily" anymore. Simple.

[THEPUMA]

Doesn't need to be "necessary" - Just buy it through the company rather than buying it personally and claiming it on your expenses.

The test is "wholly and exclusively" if bought directly by the business BUT

"wholly, exclusively and necessarily" if claimed by the director under the old schedule E rules.

So buy anything like this directly through the company, company pays and gets an invoice in the company name, and you don't have to think about "necessarily" anymore. Simple.

Agreed but I bet you £1.50 young Jason bought it personally and expensed it.

[Jason D]

Oh dear

Agreed but I bet you £1.50 young Jason bought it personally and expensed it.

You just lost your £1.50.

Company credit card i'm afraid. As per all company expenses.

Double or nothing?

By the way I am an accountant not a contractor.

[THEPUMA]

You just lost your £1.50.

Company credit card i'm afraid. As per all company expenses.

Double or nothing?

By the way I am an accountant not a contractor.

Oh well you win some you lose some.