Reply to: Permanent Place of Residence

Re: Blondiebeeb

OK. This is the sort of thing I'm talking about. Blondiebeeb, a citation is an improvement, but it might help if you detail the source.

Googling it, I get 1 link to an old pdf from Jan '98 of Booklet 490, which has been deleted from the IR's site. If you're referring to this document, the quote is quite out-of-context: 8.9 relates specifically to personal tax relief for travel expenses incurred for short-term training courses that are not paid for by one's employer. Further, this reference is not even in the latest version.

Quoting like this is scurrilous, I say!

Spooky

Ronald,

I will pay you loads of cash for the contract. There you go I can bulls**t really well.

Re: ************

Heh, I've got a clone!

Alas, ************ I'm not your troll, unless I'm having a subconscious identity crisis and my name really is Dave. No, I know Ronald in RL, and like him I'm an IT contractor who works away during the week, but lives with family in London.

I've worked through ParasolIT for the past year, and they've got this 5/7 rule that says I can't claim for weekend rentals on my business flat, I find out now has no basis in the Revenue's own procedure manuals. I've also looked at going through Brookson recently, and was the one who alerted Ronald to their seemingly unfounded policy of having to be the renter or mortgagee.

I suppose I'm just fed up trying to get a definitive consensus on this issue. I'm happy to be proved wrong. I just get hacked off when people in forums present their opinions as fact without providing any supporting evidence for verification.

Re: Blondiebeeb

Clement - would you mind telling us who you are ?

We had a bit of a conflict on our contractor website with a chap called Dave Lehman, who works for one of the umbrella companies and to be honest your posting style is remarkably similar.

Please don't take offence if you aren't Dave Lehman by the way

Re: Blondiebeeb

8.9

"where the employee has tos tay away from home while on the course-for the additional cost of staying away from home. Employees will be entitled to relief for this only if they have on-going financial commitments at their home address, for example, the cost of maintaining their own home or of paying rent to retain accommodation."

at the end of the day, you will only know if you check with the IR.

Re: Blondiebeeb

Sorry Blondiebeeb, but did you read this whole thread? Or more specifically, the links I posted above? On what basis do you (and ContractorUmbrella) make the statement that rent/ mortgage/ bills are required to be paid for the Revenue to deem a property your home?

You've missed the point when you say "everyone could get tax relief on their first place of residence". We're talking here about what test the Revenue applies to your first place of residence when allowing you to claim relief on business accomodation under Schedule E.

According to the their own documentation, if you have to pay for accomodation whilst travelling for business, and this expenditure is additional to your normal outlay for living accomodation, the claim is legitimate. The level and nature of your normal expenditure not irrelevant.

In Example 1 of the examples I cited earlier, the woman has no permanent home, therefore she incurs no additional expense and can't claim. In Example 2, the man does, even though he's paying nothing on his home while he's away, so he can claim.

Quite frankly, I'm sick of people making declarations (and indeed, umbrella companies making policy) based on hearsay. Don't make blanket statements without backing them up. Point me to a legal precedent or any official tax documentation that supports your arguement.

Re: Spooky

> they are just really pleased to get somebody that is not on drugs.

xoggoth - I'd strongly recommend you don't mention that you post here. I'd especially recommend that if, like the war, you accidentally mention it you certainly don't let slip your id.

Re: Spooky

The umbrella company is right-you can only claim tax relief on the second place of residence in the UK where you are paying rent, the bills or a mortgage on the first place of residence.

If you think about it, this makes sense, as otherwise everyone could get tax relief on their first place of residence

Re: Spooky

We all knew and said that but the definitive quote of clause and paragraph is worth applauding. Clement yeh!!!!!!

Re: Spooky

Sorry for the delay in replying rknight73 but I had to play cricket. We won incidently. You can have my contract if you can bullsh*t extremely well and pay me a loads of cash.

Clement... you are the cross post fiend. Super effort that. You should be working for the IR.

Re: Expenses

OK kids, here 'tis. Thanks to Bradley on the other thread.

From the Revenue's Schedule E Procedural Manual:

To qualify for a deduction the [accomodation] subsistence costs must be attributable to the business travel in the sense that they are costs incurred in travelling that are additional to any costs that the employee would incur if it were not for the business travel.

Ronald's accomodation costs are additional. The woman in their example makes things even clearer:

She has no permanent home...This is the only accommodation available to her.

Ronald has permanent accomodation available to him in the form of his family's house in London. Therefore, his accomodation costs in Cardiff, be they hotel or rented flat (assuming it's solely for business purposes) are fully deductible.

Unless anyone wants to point to any official doco that contradicts this...

Spooky

Ronald,

I rent a place in London where I live during the week (contract is in the City) but family etc. is in Cardiff - so my situation is exactly the same as yours except for the destinations being reversed.

I also claim the rent back against tax - my accountant has said that this is fine even though I live with folks/girlf in Cardiff between contracts.

What do you do I'm looking to move back - can I have your contract?!

Re: Expenses

I find that, despite the standard six months contract, I can almost always talk landlords into accepting something shorter in practice. Never not got my deposit back yet.

This could be because of my charm, or more likely, in the sort of places I tend to rent as a dedicated cheapskate, they are just really pleased to get somebody that is not on drugs.

IR35 has nothing to do with whether you can claim this expense.

Re: Expenses

Re. Darren's post... As best as I can tell I'm outside IR35, but no one really know's until tested. My contract has passed and I meet the working practices qualification of a couple of contracting orgs.

Good point re. hotel expenses. I stayed in a hotel during my first 2 weeks @ 45/night. They couldn't even find me an iron some mornings. Great impression starting a new contract. Renting is light-years better value (but there's a risk if your contract's cancelled of course). Its 40% cheaper than the dog-house I was originally staying in and it rents for £600 a week as a daily serviced apartment (nice to expense that!).

The mob I'm fighting over this says if I was in a hotel during the week, it would qualify as my home for taxation purposes (just sleep in the park on the weekends). Sense, logic, window.

Re. Fiddleabout. All I want is a contract in London so I can stay there instead of wasting 10 hours a week commuting and my Sunday night. Unfortunately there wasn't one at the time for the work I do.

Re: Expenses

> I do not understand your logic fiddleabout??

Looks like nobody else does either so I'm probably wrong. Certainly if it is costing you more than your* normal expenditure I agree it should be chargeable as expenses. It just seemed to me that you were a bit of a nomad who was claiming to live elsewhere to legitimise your normal living expenses.

*beware chav accountants who can't spell