Reply to: Could I expense My Business-Related Training Course?

[NotAllThere]

If it's therapy, then it's not claimable. If it's a personal development course - presentation skills, that kind of thing - then it could well be, even if the course is tailored to those who stutter - and identical to the therapy...

Bear in mind that there are folk here who would say that you can't claim for a course that gives an IT contractor new IT skills. Or even enhances existing ones.

I'd put a claim through and risk it being knocked back at investigation.

[SueEllen]

Speech therapy classes are not a training course

Dynamic has stated that the classes are courses.

If so, then if he gets a certificate of attendance/completion then he should be able to claim.

There are soft skill business courses (I've been on a few free ones in the past) where they give you a certificate or sign a continuous professional training folder from various institutions.7

Edited to say: In fact I've never been on a course where they aren't happy to give you some sort of certificate just to ensure you know the details of the trainers.

[Vallah]

Speech therapy classes are not a training course

According to the OP they are:

I take 1 or 2 speech training courses (e.g. telephone skills for people who stammer, etc

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

Is there an exemption for training courses? Yes.
Would that training course help him with his job? Yes.
Are personal skills courses that help people with their jobs allowable for tax? Yes.

To sum up, certain items that have a duality of purpose have exemptions that allow them to be treated as valid expenses allowable for tax. Training courses as we have seen, fulfil that criteria. Is there an exemption for hair transplants, barristers' robes and plastic surgery? No. They're not training courses, or any other item of expense that qualifies as a valid expense.

Speech therapy classes are not a training course

[Vallah]

Then by the same token anything that gave an individual confidence, and therefore a better chance of getting customers, should be allowable as an expense because it will prove useful when performing his/her duties - hair transplants? Plastic surgery? IF HMR&C wouldn't allow barristers to claim for the cost of their robes because there was duality of purpose I really can't see them allowing speech therepy

Is there an exemption for training courses? Yes.
Would that training course help him with his job? Yes.
Are personal skills courses that help people with their jobs allowable for tax? Yes.

To sum up, certain items that have a duality of purpose have exemptions that allow them to be treated as valid expenses allowable for tax. Training courses as we have seen, fulfil that criteria. Is there an exemption for hair transplants, barristers' robes and plastic surgery? No. They're not training courses, or any other item of expense that qualifies as a valid expense.

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

Apologies, it's Outward Bound and Prince's Trust. The point remains the same.

The point is, the legislation gives certain exemptions from the wholly and necessarily requirements. For example, provision of mobile phones, late night taxis and health screening. None of those are wholly and necessarily incurred in relation to employment. Training is another exemption. The only conditions it therefore needs to satisfy are the ones I listed on the page before, ie:
Prove useful to the employee when performing his duties, or
Qualify the employee to undertake the employment.

I maintain that training undertaken to give the OP a better chance of presenting a professional image in front of clients would fulfil the first requirement, in which case it is a tax deductible expense.

Then by the same token anything that gave an individual confidence, and therefore a better chance of getting customers, should be allowable as an expense because it will prove useful when performing his/her duties - hair transplants? Plastic surgery? IF HMR&C wouldn't allow barristers to claim for the cost of their robes because there was duality of purpose I really can't see them allowing speech therepy

[TheFaQQer]

Apologies, it's Outward Bound and Prince's Trust. The point remains the same.

Not quite - the training courses offered by Prince's Trust are only available to the unemployed or children at school. Nice of HMRC to offer an explicit exemption for something irrelevant - in the same way, all training courses that are run on Saturn are also exempt of all tax

FWIW, I agree with you, though - it's certainly something that I would claim and then argue with HMRC in that event. There is a convincing enough argument that should preclude any penalty for deliberate tax evasion, so I would do it. If the accountant says no, find one that doesn't.

I disagree with my accountant on a number of things - at the end of the day, they are providing advice which I then choose not to follow, based on my amateur opinion (and the CUK collective, of course!)

[Vallah]

It doesn't mention D of E.

Apologies, it's Outward Bound and Prince's Trust. The point remains the same.

The point is, the legislation gives certain exemptions from the wholly and necessarily requirements. For example, provision of mobile phones, late night taxis and health screening. None of those are wholly and necessarily incurred in relation to employment. Training is another exemption. The only conditions it therefore needs to satisfy are the ones I listed on the page before, ie:
Prove useful to the employee when performing his duties, or
Qualify the employee to undertake the employment.

I maintain that training undertaken to give the OP a better chance of presenting a professional image in front of clients would fulfil the first requirement, in which case it is a tax deductible expense.

[TheFaQQer]

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/guidance/480.pdf

See Page 79. I'm certain that if Duke of Edinburgh scheme attendance would qualify, then so would this case.

It doesn't mention D of E.

[Vallah]

Why? The Duke of Edinburgh Scheme is a registered charity

What's that got to do with anything? Payments to registered charities aren't automatically tax allowable expenses. Anyway, my point is that if walking up mountains on a DoE or other leadership scheme is a tax allowable expense (ie "wholly and necessarily") then surely this case would count as well.

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/guidance/480.pdf

See Page 79. I'm certain that if Duke of Edinburgh scheme attendance would qualify, then so would this case.

Why? The Duke of Edinburgh Scheme is a registered charity

[Vallah]

But the section you have quoted is not the over-riding legislation; you cannot avoid the fact that the lessons in this case have duality of purpose.

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/guidance/480.pdf

See Page 79. I'm certain that if Duke of Edinburgh scheme attendance would qualify, then so would this case.

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

I'm aware of that, but look at the legislation above.

"knowledge, skills or personal qualities which—.
(a)are likely to prove useful to the employee when performing the duties of the employment"

Now skills based training is obviously an easy point. If you go and learn about, say, UK GAAP or Excel, there's no real argument as that's purely work based. Personal qualities though, it's hard to think of any that are "wholly and exlusively". Assertiveness, negotiating, all of them would surely have a use in everyday life and therefore duality of purpose?

But the section you have quoted is not the over-riding legislation; you cannot avoid the fact that the lessons in this case have duality of purpose.

[Vallah]

But what you forget is that for an expense to be allowable it has to be wholly and exclusively for the business and there has to be no duality of purpose - this case falls under neither

I'm aware of that, but look at the legislation above.

"knowledge, skills or personal qualities which—.
(a)are likely to prove useful to the employee when performing the duties of the employment"

Now skills based training is obviously an easy point. If you go and learn about, say, UK GAAP or Excel, there's no real argument as that's purely work based. Personal qualities though, it's hard to think of any that are "wholly and exlusively". Assertiveness, negotiating, all of them would surely have a use in everyday life and therefore duality of purpose?

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

I'd argue that the course would be allowable actually.

ITEPA states that work related training is OK when:

But what you forget is that for an expense to be allowable it has to be wholly and exclusively for the business and there has to be no duality of purpose - this case falls under neither