Expense - 10 mile rule

[washed up contractor]

Blackfriars to Victoria is 10 mins on the tube. This is not a significant change in location/journey/cost.

Even as someone who lives in London I don’t think this is claimable.

Correct. Id say it's taking the piss.

[Old Greg]

I live in Sutton. I was taking Thameslink train to Blackfriars, contracted there for 18 months and expensed my travel.
Then I started with a client in London Victoria, commuting via Southern. Totally different line and route but starting point is same. Has been contracting here for the last 8 months. I still have 4 months in my contract. I haven't expensed my travel due to my new accountant. But I am still holding all the receipts and am inclined to expense all the last 8 months travel as I was always expensing my travels before joining this new accountant. I've been nearly contracting for 9 years and I have not contracted for the same client at the same location for more than 18 months so far.

So should I ignore my accountant and still expense my travels to my company or not?

Is the journey to Victoria the same cost as the journey to Blackfriars?

[LondonManc]

Personally I think your accountant has nailed it. If you had agreed a 6 month contract not a year youbcould have claimed.

IMO journey ends too close to the old one irrespective of it being a different train. Nothing significant has changed so I'd say no claim.

That said I'm sure someone will come with a different opinion. As I said London is a hot topic

I remember us discussing Canary Wharf vs the City.
iirc, we agreed that if you live in Bow, it's significantly different, if you live in Manchester, it isn't. Sucks that the journey that isn't significantly different is the one that involves accommodation.

[MrButton]

Expense - 10 mile rule

Blackfriars to Victoria is 10 mins on the tube. This is not a significant change in location/journey/cost.

Even as someone who lives in London I don’t think this is claimable.

[northernladuk]

Personally I think your accountant has nailed it. If you had agreed a 6 month contract not a year youbcould have claimed.

IMO journey ends too close to the old one irrespective of it being a different train. Nothing significant has changed so I'd say no claim.

That said I'm sure someone will come with a different opinion. As I said London is a hot topic

[kembljoe]

I live in Sutton. I was taking Thameslink train to Blackfriars, contracted there for 18 months and expensed my travel.
Then I started with a client in London Victoria, commuting via Southern. Totally different line and route but starting point is same. Has been contracting here for the last 8 months. I still have 4 months in my contract. I haven't expensed my travel due to my new accountant. But I am still holding all the receipts and am inclined to expense all the last 8 months travel as I was always expensing my travels before joining this new accountant. I've been nearly contracting for 9 years and I have not contracted for the same client at the same location for more than 18 months so far.

So should I ignore my accountant and still expense my travels to my company or not?

[northernladuk]

BTW there is an epic 220 page thread about the 24.month rule at the top of this very part of the forum. The rules are clear in there and London is discussed endlessly.

[northernladuk]

I don't think his numbers are quite correct. The 24 month rule is very well documented. The only grey area is when it comes to London as there is much debate about what constitutes a significant change in cost or journey. A couple of tube stops isn't significant but what is. 6, 7 8? To us that work in one city and they switch to another then it's not at all significant. To the London guys it is.

One thing I'd be interested to know is where you were working before the 18 mother. If it was also in close vicinty you could have breached it a long time ago.

But anyway. You have to stop claiming one you expect to be in a geographical location for over 24 months. If you've done 18 months then you can claim for another 6 months... But not a day over. If the 6 months takes you over 24 months then you can't claim any of it. I think he's got that bit wrong.

[kembljoe]

Hi,

I've recently changed my accountant. My new accountant says:

"I need to make you aware of the 24 month rule. For example contract A was for 18 months and located at Canary Wharf, you then have a new contract (Contract B duration 18 months) and the new place of work is located in London Bridge. This scenario will not reset the 24 month clock as your new location is on the way to the old location. If the new location is in Heathrow the 24 month rule clock will be reset, because this is in the complete opposite direction and more than 10 miles away from the old location.



The HMRC rules states that the cost of the journey or the journey itself has to change significantly from your old work location to your new location. Generally contractors working for clients in the city or London Docklands cannot reset their 24 month rule clock, despite changing clients."

.......

I was working at Blackfriars for 18 months for a client, now moved to London Victoria for a different end client. So as a contractor according to my contractor, I can't expense my travel costs to my company.

First time I have heard this, my previous accountant has never mentioned anything about this, even though I changed my client within 3 mile radius, he was ok for me to expense to my new client.

What do you think?