24 month rule resetting the clock

[The Spartan]

To re set the 24 month clock, to all intents and purposes you need to spend some time in a different geographical location and not just a few miles away.

So theoretically if you work in London for say 21 months and your current client says we want to renew for 6 months (Which would obviously take you over 24 months), could you say yes no problem but only if you allow me to work from home(provided you don't live in the same location)? Would that be enough?

[BoredBloke]

I think the 24 month rule thing is a complete pain in the @rse and it should be client based. When I come to look for a contract, my preference is to have one a commutable distance from home. Unfortunately these tend to be rarer than rocking horse poo. Since most of the roles that are suitable for me are London based it means that each 2 years or so I have to look to take another contract elsewhere to reset this pointless clock.

[The Spartan]

I agree the bulk of the good contracts for testing are in London and it would seem counterproductive to move from a location just because of the 24 month rule.

But then when has there been common sense at HMRC.

[psychocandy]

Nah. I reckon (l).

Why listen to promises etc? Until its a done deal then its not happening.

[northernladuk]

So theoretically if you work in London for say 21 months and your current client says we want to renew for 6 months (Which would obviously take you over 24 months), could you say yes no problem but only if you allow me to work from home(provided you don't live in the same location)? Would that be enough?

But if you work from home you would not be claiming mileage surely

You would have to work out at what point you have worked their less than 40% over a two year rolling window.

[northernladuk]

I agree the bulk of the good contracts for testing are in London and it would seem counterproductive to move from a location just because of the 24 month rule.

But then when has there been common sense at HMRC.

I think the 24 month rule thing is a complete pain in the @rse and it should be client based. When I come to look for a contract, my preference is to have one a commutable distance from home. Unfortunately these tend to be rarer than rocking horse poo. Since most of the roles that are suitable for me are London based it means that each 2 years or so I have to look to take another contract elsewhere to reset this pointless clock.

But you have to remember who this rule was designed for and it wasn't us. The idea is to help people relocating hence the two years is seen as a reasonable amount of time for you to make a decision if you were going to move closer to the location you are working in. It wasn't designed for 1 man band contractors to claim their subsistence back. If you have been contracting within commutable distance from home why should you get a tax break on mileage. Permies don't. Claiming tax back on stuff like this isn't a given, it is to help a period of uncertainty. Stop thinking of it as a free ticket and more as a bonus for a long commute.

[Weller1]

Did you stop claiming as soon as you knew you were going to be there 24 month or at 24 months?

I stopped when i knew i was going up to and beyond 24 months i..e when i accepted a contract extension.

[Weller1]

Your Umbrella company is talking a load of old rubbish.

The 24 month rule has nothing to to with employment, it has EVERYTHING to do with location.

See here for details: http://forums.contractoruk.com/accou...ml#post1696559

Yeah exactly as i thought, thanks

[mudskipper]

This is only a mild concern since it will only have a potential detrimental effect IF hmrc ever investigate you. If they dont, they'll be none the wiser.

Has anyone ever had to pay back expenses under the 24 month rule if they didn't actually claim expenses for > 24 months? I'm guessing the chances of HMRC investigating someone who hasn't actually claimed over the 24 months are pretty slim.

[northernladuk]

Has anyone ever had to pay back expenses under the 24 month rule if they didn't actually claim expenses for > 24 months? I'm guessing the chances of HMRC investigating someone who hasn't actually claimed over the 24 months are pretty slim.

I imagine they are but is it slim enough to make it worth paying it all back, fines and interest just for a 20% saving mileage? If it is that slim then why not just cook the books properly, put the TV in, redcorate the house as it includes your office, take the spouse out on the company every week etc. I don't see the chance of being investigated part of the decision making when doing your finances properly personally.