Most tax-efficient option: living in rented or owned property in London?

[oscarose]

Well you will ask questions on a free forum. You ought to be thankful people have taken the time to respond instead of being so rude to them, particularly when you have so little understanding of your situation. I am glad your tax affairs are running so smoothly all you have to pick on is grammar.

+1,000,000

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

LisaContractorUmbrella, what's the difference between 'won't' and 'can't' when it comes to commutability? I thought everywhere in the world is commutable from everywhere else in the world. All you need is your own private supersonic jet! So, I won't hear none of this 'can't' from you - that just sounds like you're lazy!

And what's 'sockyism'? Stop making up words. I should call you Tolkien.

northernladuk, take a breather and relax with a Cadbury's Caramel. Your grasp on basic English is simply awful. At least I'm on here trying to get answers. You should go to an English grammar forum.

Seems that SueEllen is the only one that speaks sense round here and understands the situation regarding why I'm renting in London (owned property already rented before London contract got). Thanks for explaining to LisaContractorUmbrella.

Very sorry Neo but these insults are really not up to the standard that we have come to expect on CUK.

Had you considered that you don't really want answers from the people on here? What you really want is affirmation and we are not prepared to give it.

Oh and a 'socky' is one of the regulars on here who has temporarily adopted another persona in order to annoy the tulip out of the others

HTH

[northernladuk]

Very sorry Neo but these insults are really not up to the standard that we have come to expect on CUK.

HTH

Too right! We expect a much higher standard of insult than that!! There is even a nice smilie in the list for some proper insulting! give it a try....

[Sockpuppet]

I should also add to that list that I am also renting out two rooms in my Surrey property on a lodger basis, but I have done this since I purchased the property in 2003 and spent five years living at the property continously like this before I got a job in London in 2008. I believe renting rooms out in a first home (on a resident landlord basis) is permitted and not taxable in any case.

There is another point here. I hope these London gigs are suitably far apart as to not fail the 2 year rule on temporary work places. Remember this is HMRCs suitably far apart, not your own definition. In which case its a mute point as you can't claim even if it was wholly and exclusively.

[Guest22]

You ought to be thankful people have taken the time to respond instead of being so rude to them...

I thought this was pretty rude tbh:

Words fail me. Your grasp on basic tax rules is simply awful...

Reap what you sow.

Do unto others what you would have others do unto you.

Oh and a 'socky' is one of the regulars on here who has temporarily adopted another persona in order to annoy the tulip out of the others

OK, guys, you got me. But try and guess who I am. I'll give you a clue - it's someone who has replied to this thread!

[northernladuk]

There is another point here. I hope these London gigs are suitably far apart as to not fail the 2 year rule on temporary work places. Remember this is HMRCs suitably far apart, not your own definition. In which case its a mute point as you can't claim even if it was wholly and exclusively.

A very good point!

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

I thought this was pretty rude tbh:



Reap what you sow.

Do unto others what you would have others do unto you.



OK, guys, you got me. But try and guess who I am. I'll give you a clue - it's someone who has replied to this thread!

Is your 'normal' persona a clue?

[Pondlife]

OK, guys, you got me. But try and guess who I am. I'll give you a clue - it's someone who has replied to this thread!

If so, why are you trolling in the prof forums then.

[Guest22]

There is another point here. I hope these London gigs are suitably far apart as to not fail the 2 year rule on temporary work places. Remember this is HMRCs suitably far apart, not your own definition. In which case its a mute point as you can't claim even if it was wholly and exclusively.

Agreed, this is a very good point, and probably the only useful reply I've had in this discussion. However, does an HMRC definition exist or is it subjective? I myself can say that even when I was not contracting but working in London in permanent jobs between 2008 and 2011, I relocated to London Monday to Friday in rented accommodation at completely my own expense. There was no claiming travel or subsistence or anything like that. The only reason I did it was purely to reduce the commute because the commute was too far from my property in Surrey.

By the way, I should mention that my property is not actually in Surrey, it's geographically in Hampshire, but its postal address is in Surrey. In other words, you write 'Surrey' on the envelope when posting a letter to my address, but I pay my Council Tax to a district council in Hampshire. This might give an idea as to how far my Surrey property is from London, as Surrey's a big place! Also, I have been diagnosed with DSPD, so early morning commutes are difficult.

I'm still not clear on the whole PPR thing. If my Surrey property is my PPR and I live in my London property, does this not mean I can claim travel and subsistence as if I were renting or staying in a hotel, because I purchased and am only staying at the London property for the purpose of work/business, regardless of the fact I own it?

If so, why are you trolling in the prof forums then.

Why are you trolling in the prof forums?

[SueEllen]

Agreed, this is a very good point, and probably the only useful reply I've had in this discussion. However, does an HMRC definition exist or is it subjective? I myself can say that even when I was not contracting but working in London in permanent jobs between 2008 and 2011, I relocated to London Monday to Friday in rented accommodation at completely my own expense. There was no claiming travel or subsistence or anything like that. The only reason I did it was purely to reduce the commute because the commute was too far from my property in Surrey.

So you actually live in London then.

Any tax inspector will ask where you lived when you worked in London previously. The fact that you rented somewhere and lived there more nights in the week then in Hampshire clearly indicates you live in London.

By the way, I should mention that my property is not actually in Surrey, it's geographically in Hampshire, but its postal address is in Surrey. In other words, you write 'Surrey' on the envelope when posting a letter to my address, but I pay my Council Tax to a district council in Hampshire. This might give an idea as to how far my Surrey property is from London, as Surrey's a big place! Also, I have been diagnosed with DSPD, so early morning commutes are difficult.

Some parts of Hampshire are easier and faster to get to from London then some parts of Surrey.


So that excuse won't wash.

I'm still not clear on the whole PPR thing. If my Surrey property is my PPR and I live in my London property, does this not mean I can claim travel and subsistence as if I were renting or staying in a hotel, because I purchased and am only staying at the London property for the purpose of work/business, regardless of the fact I own it?

The fact you own it will be looked at as you look like you are opening committing tax evasion.