Sticking out a boring contract

[Old Greg]

Which bit?

All of it.

[northernladuk]

Why do I need a link to point out £10 is not a substantial amount? Bit of common needs to be applied as well.

[TheFaQQer]

Why do I need a link to point out £10 is not a substantial amount? Bit of common needs to be applied as well.

Where does HMRC document that they are talking about explicit values rather than percentages?

Why should trebling the cost not count as a substantial difference?

[Old Greg]

Why do I need a link to point out £10 is not a substantial amount? Bit of common needs to be applied as well.

Is £2,200 p.a. substantial?

[northernladuk]

Is £2,200 p.a. substantial?

Not to me

[Old Greg]

Where does HMRC document that they are talking about explicit values rather than percentages?

Why should trebling the cost not count as a substantial difference?

There is something about that MF avatar that makes you want to stick the knife in, isn't there?

[Old Greg]

Nope.

Is it trivial?

[northernladuk]

Where does HMRC document that they are talking about explicit values rather than percentages?

Why should trebling the cost not count as a substantial difference?

Depends if that cost is going up from peanuts to 3x peanuts.

I was just trying to put a reminder in to the discussion that you have to consider substantial. Some of the posts were discussing the change of 10 miles etc.... The term is littered throughout the HMRC guidance yet we have ended up analysing micro situations and getting giddy about it.

We are also getting too hung up on fictitious examples using cost alone and we have already agreed that going to work in the car costs £10 in petrol, taking the train costing £40 does not reset the clock.

[Old Greg]

Depends if that cost is going up from peanuts to 3x peanuts.

I was just trying to put a reminder in to the discussion that you have to consider substantial. Some of the posts were discussing the change of 10 miles etc.... The term is littered throughout the HMRC guidance yet we have ended up analysing micro situations and getting giddy about it.

We are also getting too hung up on fictitious examples using cost alone and we have already agreed that going to work in the car costs £10 in petrol, taking the train costing £40 does not reset the clock.

You need to look at the factors in combination:

- Destination
- Journey
- Cost

I will quote what I always do:

Sometimes it may be difficult to decide whether a change of workplace should be recognised. The basic principle is that a change in the location or the boundaries of a workplace will be recognised as a change of workplace where the change has a substantial effect on:

the journey an employee has to make to get to work and, in particular,
the cost of that journey.

In practice you should recognise the change of workplace in all cases except where the change has made no significant difference to the commuting journey.

The baseline assumption is that a change of workplace is a change unless the journey (and in particular the cost) is not significantly affected. HMRC may take a view, but if you had the stomach to go to tribunal, I don't believe £2,200 p.a. would be seen as not substantial.

Edit: further thought. Is there a confidential HMRC helpline where they will give a position on this kind of thing?

[northernladuk]

You need to look at the factors in combination:

- Destination
- Journey
- Cost

I will quote what I always do:

Absolutely agree, but the thread wasn't taking all three in to consideration.