HMRC won't appeal NI decision
Two businesses paid their employees’ car allowances. They said no NI was payable on these to the extent the cars were used for business. HMRC argued the payments were just earnings and so liable to NI. How did the Upper Tribunal (UT) rule?
-
Accounting for VAT if there is no cash payment
Your business has submitted repayment returns for the last two quarters and you are concerned that you might have underpaid output tax on some supplies where no money has changed hands. Are your concerns justified?
-
Treatment of distributions under review
The government has launched a consultation on modernising the tax treatment of distributions and repayments of capital by companies. The proposals could affect the distinction between dividends taxed as income and capital payments subject to CGT. What changes are being considered?
-
Tax relief on equipment you haven’t paid for (yet)
The timing of tax relief for purchases of equipment isn’t straightforward when payments are delayed or goods are purchased through hire purchase (HP) agreements. How can you use these rules to your advantage and get tax relief before you’ve paid the final invoice?
The Upper Tribunal (UT) simultaneously considered two similar but unconnected disputes: Laing O’Rourke Services Ltd (L) v HMRC and Willmott Dixon Holdings Ltd (W) v HMRC . Both companies paid their employees car allowances which HMRC argued were earnings liable to Class 1 employees’ and employers’ NI. L and W argued that the special rules overrode the normal earnings rule so that the payments should be disregarded for NI purposes.
The UT confirmed that the car allowances were earnings. In respect of the “disregard” rules, it could not find anything that required payments to be reimbursement of motor expenses already incurred. In fact, when the NI rules were created they were intended to mirror the tax rules as far as possible, and they apply the exemption regardless of timing. In reality, motor expenses, apart from fuel, tend to be incurred sporadically, e.g. insurance, servicing, so to limit the tax and NI exemption to expenses already incurred would be illogical and defeat the purpose of the rules. The UT therefore ruled for L and W and against HMRC, which has now confirmed it will not appeal the decision.
By confirming that it won’t appeal, HMRC has opened the door to NI refunds going back six years. It is possible that the rules will be changed to prevent claims for future years though.
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.