Question re business expense/benefit in kind - CCTV costs for residence/home office

[seyre1972]

All -

thanks for the sound advice. (and the spirited discussion it seems to have kickedoff ..... )

I'll err on the side of caution when it comes to expenses/benefit in kind and pay for it myself.

xoggoth - I'm looking to buy IP cameras with a higher resolution rather than BNC style cctv - hence the higher cost for the equipment. This also means I can use Power Over Ethernet rathern than dual BNC/Power cables to every camera - keeping my wife happy


regards,


seyre1972

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

Certainly don't know for sure but can't see why, if genuinely installed to protect business equipment, it is not allowable.

The fact that it could have other uses is not relevant, this wholly and exclusively thing is often misunderstood. For example, if you do not already have broadband and have to install it in your home for work use, it is not disallowed simply because you could use it personally.

Employment income: household expenses: broadband internet charges

The rule really covers the other way round, if you already have something for personal use, you cannot then claim for business use if it it does not actually cost you any extra.

I can't find any official guidance but the way I see it is that the CCTV is not necessary for the protection of the equipment being used by the business as it would not be an essential requirement of the insurance company when providing insurance for the equipment and therefore the business is protected as the equipment could be replaced free of charge in the event of a theft. It could also be argued that the installation of a CCTV camera may assist with the apprehension of the perpetrator but would do nothing to prevent the theft. Therefore the CCTV camera is not essential to the business and cannot be claimed.

In your example, broadband access is required in order to be able to fulfil the terms of the contract and therefore, even though there could be a duality of purpose broadband is a necessity so, at the very least, a proportion of the cost could be expensed.

[xoggoth]

You would think there would be guidance on this. Security for small businesses is a very big issue. Been a few thefts of tools and equipment from such places round here recently. Two tradesman I know have had stuff taken from a garage and a van parked on private property. Lot of reported equipment thefts from farm outhouses etc too.

All very well to say it's insured but there is a lot off effort involved in a claim and, even assuming you can claim from that bunch of frauds who calll themselves insurance companies, your premiums will go up.

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

You would think wouldn't you but I couldn't find anything relevant on the HMR&C site, mind you that doesn't mean to say it's not there

[xoggoth]

Someone asked the same question on accountingweb and got no answers:

CCTV tax deductible

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

Only answer now I suppose is to ring HMR&C and ask them - care for a small wager on their answer

[SueEllen]

Only answer now I suppose is to ring HMR&C and ask them - care for a small wager on their answer

NOOOOO.

Then 2-4 years down the line someone queries it properly due to some tax investigation or something, and the answer changes to yes.

[northernladuk]

There is the question of what all this is worth to your pocket and how well you like to sleep at night. The relatively small saving compared to the ambiguity makes it a no brainer in my book at this moment.