Are camping pods “buildings” for capital allowances purposes?
The First-tier Tribunal (FTT) recently considered whether a number of camping pods could qualify for the annual investment allowance. As with many similar cases, the answer was “it depends”. What can you learn from it?
-
HMRC clarifies treatment of averaging relief under MTD IT
HMRC has updated its guidance to explain how averaging relief claims will operate under Making Tax Digital for Income Tax (MTD IT). The clarification addresses concerns about how farmers and creators will claim relief once quarterly reporting becomes mandatory. What has changed?
-
Double up on the employment allowance
You’re the sole shareholder of a limited company which employs several members of staff. You’re working on plans to start another business with an ex-colleague. Can both businesses benefit from the full employment allowance (EA)?
-
VAT cut for children's holiday activities over summer
The government has announced a temporary reduction in the rate of VAT applying to certain children's holiday activity programmes during the summer holidays. The measure is intended to help families with childcare costs during the school break. What has changed?
The company, Acorn Venture Ltd (AV), purchased 26 camping pods to provide accommodation for school children and teachers on residential trips. The cost of the pods was approximately £272,000. AV claimed capital allowances under the annual investment allowance on its tax return. The overall position was a loss. However, upon enquiry HMRC disallowed the claim on the basis that the pods were buildings or fixed structures.
At the hearing, the FTT made a distinction between the two types of pod included in the claim. There were 20 “basic” pods, and six more developed pods the FTT designated “teacher” pods. The basic pods were anchored to the ground to prevent movement, e.g. in windy weather. The pods were not living accommodation. At best, it could be said that they offered a similar function to a tent. The FTT determined that these basic pods were not fixed structures, and allowances could be claimed in respect of their cost. In contrast, the six teacher pods had flushing toilets, washing facilities and a kitchen area. The plumbing fixtures meant that the pods had to be secured to the ground with a greater degree of permanence than the basic pods. They were held to be fixed structures, so allowances couldn’t be claimed in respect of these pods.
This just goes to show how the devil is often in the detail with capital allowances. The two types of pod looked identical from the outside, but the internal features made the teacher pods more akin to living accommodation than a temporary shelter.





This website uses both its own and third-party cookies to analyze our services and navigation on our website in order to improve its contents (analytical purposes: measure visits and sources of web traffic). The legal basis is the consent of the user, except in the case of basic cookies, which are essential to navigate this website.