- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Company Secretary - mobile phone charge
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by northernladuk View PostAnd if that is the case then even more reason not to do it. The bill they will get after being investigated on top of everything else could be astronomical using that scale.Comment
-
Originally posted by Jeremiah at Smith Craven View PostTo Keep things very simple just make the company sec an employee of your company and then you can put the mobile phone cost and contract through the business.
Your accountant can easliy put the company sec on the payroll records if they are not on.
Here is a link to the one mobile phone per employee that was big news in Feb this year
HM Revenue & Customs: Revenue & Customs Brief 02/12
As mentioned make sure the contract is in the company name and the payments come out of the business bank account and your sorted as long as you can get a good business contract!I couldn't give two fornicators! Yes, really!Comment
-
Originally posted by Jeremiah at Smith Craven View PostAgreed if the company sec is not an employee i personally would air on the side of caution and not do it.
However if the company sec is an employee of the company then HMRC states one mobile phone per employee is allowable.
It's err (as in error) on the side of caution not air.
I couldn't give two fornicators! Yes, really!Comment
-
Originally posted by Jessica@WhiteFieldTax View PostIn practice - there are always exceptions - its not something HMRC tend to pick up on - that I can tell you from having looked after 2500 or so clients.
IME is low risk.Comment
-
Originally posted by FiveTimes View PostI don't want to sound pedantic but "air on the side of caution" ?
If the company sec is not an employee then you cant do it plain and simple. (IMHO)Originally posted by MaryPoppinsI'd still not breastfeed a naziOriginally posted by vetranUrine is quite nourishingComment
-
Originally posted by Jessica@WhiteFieldTax View PostHowever technically:
~ if contract in company name, claim calls +rental
~ if contract in private name, claim calls only, otherwise there is a benefit in kind on the rental
The monthly contract fee covers a subsidised or 'free' handset, or included 'free' minutes, or both. So which of these elements attracts the BiK?
In my view it must be the handset subsidy that attracts the BiK - because, if the contract is in the employee's name then they have effectively been given a phone, rather than being provided with a company asset. The BiK cannot be due to the 'free' minutes element, because HMRC have already conceded that the Co. can pay for all call charges including personal use.
This matters because a SIM only contract obviously does not include a handset subsidy, so if this is what attracts the BiK then we can forget all the nonsense about who's name is on the account and just go for the best deal instead.Comment
-
Originally posted by d000hg View PostBased on what? The things that have been quoted are to clarify that an employee can use their phone for personal calls, not to say only employees are allowed phones.
The company can give one phone to any employee, provided that the contract is in the company's name. This phone can then be used freely for personal use.
It is available for an employee, not a secretary or director or shareholder per se: an employee.Job motivation: how the powerful steal from the stupid.Comment
-
Originally posted by BolshieBastard View PostJeremiah! Really!?
It's err (as in error) on the side of caution not air.
Comment
-
Originally posted by ChimpMaster View PostOf course, assuming that it is mostly used for the purposes of the company's business.
BooComment
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Top 5 contractor compliance challenges, as 2025-26 nears Oct 3 08:53
- Joint and Several Liability ‘won’t retire HMRC's naughty list’ Oct 2 05:28
- What contractors can take from the Industria Umbrella Ltd case Sep 30 23:05
- Is ‘Open To Work’ on LinkedIn due an IR35 dropdown menu? Sep 30 05:57
- IR35: Control — updated for 2025-26 Sep 28 21:28
- Can a WhatsApp message really be a contract? Sep 25 20:17
- Can a WhatsApp message really be a contract? Sep 25 08:17
- ‘Subdued’ IT contractor jobs market took third tumble in a row in August Sep 25 08:07
- Are CVs medieval or just being misused? Sep 24 05:05
- Are CVs medieval or just being misused? Sep 23 21:05
Comment