City of London

[eek]

I think you are going about it all wrong. Don't let the tax dictate your work IMO. If you get a good solid gig then just pay your travel. Permies do so not sure why it should be such an issue to us.

+1 you also need to remember that the difference is not that great. You don't save the £2000 of travel expenses the rules merely save you the tax on that £2000 (so the actual saving is nearer £400-800)

[GillsMan]

If i fly in from Glasgow to city airport every week do 23.999 months at Canary wharf stay in a hotel at CW, Then my new find a job in the city and stay in the city - the clock is reset.?

The 40% rule will need to apply.

Also, in your OP did you state that you've already been working in Canary Wharf for 2.5 years? In which case, you should have stopped claiming travel from the moment you knew your work would be for longer than 2 years...

[SpontaneousOrder]

+1 you also need to remember that the difference is not that great. You don't save the £2000 of travel expenses the rules merely save you the tax on that £2000 (so the actual saving is nearer £400-800)

Although for people commuting into London the cost of a yearly season ticket is often nearer 8k or more (it is for me in Suffolk.)

[northernladuk]

If i fly in from Glasgow to city airport every week do 23.999 months at Canary wharf stay in a hotel at CW, Then my new find a job in the city and stay in the city - the clock is reset.?

There is the interesting point. On a journey of that length it is hard to argue a couple of miles change at the end is significant. We have argued until we are blue in the face about a journey in to London changing significantly i.e. 50% hike in cost (from very little to a bit more than very little) and a complete route change. You could argue (but I didn't agree) that is a significant change in route. For those that argued it is then using the same yardstick this one won't reset.

Anyway, just to be a pedant... It also ends when you KNOW you will be there 24 months so if you get a 12 months that takes you over you can't claim any of it. Am sure you knew that though.

[kesm]

Thanks, I did know that i cannot claim on travel from the moment that I knew i was going to be over the 2 years.

And i do know that the journey has to significantly change, but what does significantly mean? a few miles?

[SpontaneousOrder]

Thanks, I did know that i cannot claim on travel from the moment that I knew i was going to be over the 2 years.

And i do know that the journey has to significantly change, but what does significantly mean? a few miles?

If you read the HMRC guidelines they are ridiculously subjective and ambiguous. It seems cost is the most significant factor.

EIM32280 - Travel expenses: travel for necessary attendance: safeguards against abuse: changes to a workplace

[BoredBloke]

I'm currently in a tax imposed excile from London - when my contract finished, my 24 month clock was on 18 or 19 months. I've taken a low paying job in the north west while I wait for the 6 months to pass and I can start looking for another better paying role in London. The annoying thing is that the bulk of the work is in London - if you happen to live much further away, then you do need to be able to offset these expenses - it costs me about £100 a day to do a job in London. When I do a search for work I don't ever specify that I want to work in London....its just that is where the work happens to be. Another point which seems unfair is that these expenses are incurred in doing the work - I don't benefit from them personally - they go to pay for accomodation and meals that I wouldn't need if I was working on a commutable role. This money is spent with outher businesses who will pay tax on thier earnings etc.

[northernladuk]

Thanks, I did know that i cannot claim on travel from the moment that I knew i was going to be over the 2 years.

And i do know that the journey has to significantly change, but what does significantly mean? a few miles?

Do you really think significant is a few miles? You have to be pragmatic. I have seen the word 'geographic location' used a few times. 2 miles isn't a different geographic location. Also switch it around. If you believe 2 miles is significant what would you rate as insignificant? Not a lot of wiggle in that example is there?

[sartois]

Do you really think significant is a few miles? You have to be pragmatic. I have seen the word 'geographic location' used a few times. 2 miles isn't a different geographic location. Also switch it around. If you believe 2 miles is significant what would you rate as insignificant? Not a lot of wiggle in that example is there?

It's all very subjective though. If I cycle to work than that extra few miles is pretty significant! I notice that HMRC cite an example of an office being 10 tube stops away as being insignificant. I actually see that as quite a trek that will take an extra 30 minutes of time.

Guess it doesn't matter too much if you live in Central London as it's cheap enough to get about and the tax savings amount to peanuts. Commuting from outside of London is quite expensive though and can see it being worth arguing about.

[northernladuk]

It's all very subjective though. If I cycle to work than that extra few miles is pretty significant! I notice that HMRC cite an example of an office being 10 tube stops away as being insignificant. I actually see that as quite a trek that will take an extra 30 minutes of time.

Guess it doesn't matter too much if you live in Central London as it's cheap enough to get about and the tax savings amount to peanuts. Commuting from outside of London is quite expensive though and can see it being worth arguing about.

And again. A trek of 30 mins is significant compared to a change from London to Birmingham? You have to apply a bit of common sense here as well as the rules. This is a rule that covers everone nationally, not just someone that thinks a 30 min of time is significant.

Think about it in respect to a permie. If a permie moves from one job to another and the journey isn't too significant he wouldn't move so wouldn't require any help with relocation. He would just commute it and swallow the change. If it was a big geographical move then he can claim expenses for 2 years at which point it is reasonable to assume this period of time would allow him to make a decision as to whether to keep the job or relocate so tax benefit ends. The rule wasn't designed for contractors to keep switching gigs hence the awful wording leaving the grey areas.

But again, think clearly. 30 mins being significant? If that is your bench mark what would an insignificant change be?