Would the tax man be kind to me?

Hello,

I have just had to replace my laptop which is used almost exclusively (95%) for work related matters.

My employers won't pay for a laptop which is a bind 'cos I only hit the office every couple of weeks so need to be able to work remotely.

So.........what do you think? Would the taxman allow me to claim it as a work related expense?

Thanks in anticipation for any advice!!

[DarrenSV650S]

Deffinately
Slap as much as you can think of on it and leave it up to them to decide what is appropriate or not. Fuel, accommodation, grub .... stick pencils on it if you want to
Anything even remotely work related you stick it on there

Anyway....I'm off now........I've got an early business breakfast to attend tomorrow

Soooo......I could claim for my SV!!

It's a necessary therapeutic tool to help reduce my stress levels!

I wish!

Oh dear. No I don't think so. You are an employee - you refer to 'my employers'. You therefore pay income tax under Schedule E - NOT under Schedule D (which is for self-employed peeps - and which is slightly more generous). The test is whether the spend was incurred 'wholly exclusively and necessarily' for the purpose of your employment. If there is ANY element of dual purpose then I'm afraid you're on a losing wicket. Is the spend exclusively for work? You could try to argue that it is, but the moment you concede that there's an element of personal use I think you'd get a caning

Depending on the size of the company, speak to the guys in purchasing. Might be possible for them to buy it and claim the tax back on it for you, i.e. sell it to you at a "subsidised" rate

Maybe not 100% legal, but when the taxman robs us 24/7/365 why should you worry about robbing a few quid back off him

Pete

Returning to the original question - you would be very lucky to get away with 95% business use. The taxman [despite what people think] is quite reasonable provided you are. If you can justify a percentage they will allow it. If you cant they wont.

For example as an ex-Revenue officer I would look at it like this: you work 60 hours and can prove that constantly is the case. Then you could argue of the 168 hours per week, if 56 hours are spent sleeping then you can argue 60 hours of the 112 are business so you get 53.5% business use.

Thats how it works. Justifiable, supportable and reasonable.

Expect to get laughed at for 95% if its not bought by work.

[TEC]

Originally Posted by lynw

.... if 56 hours are spent sleeping ....

Hmm a sleepy head then

[TSM]

Originally Posted by Ed

Oh dear. No I don't think so. You are an employee - you refer to 'my employers'. You therefore pay income tax under Schedule E - NOT under Schedule D (which is for self-employed peeps - and which is slightly more generous). The test is whether the spend was incurred 'wholly exclusively and necessarily' for the purpose of your employment. If there is ANY element of dual purpose then I'm afraid you're on a losing wicket. Is the spend exclusively for work? You could try to argue that it is, but the moment you concede that there's an element of personal use I think you'd get a caning

A freind i know used to work in the department that delt with thoes tax issues. They went into one company and saw they bought a load of clothes and marked it an tax decutable thing because it was for work, but when the looked at the clothing and saw that it did not have work tags on it they said that it was possable that the clothes could be used outside of work and so they slapped them with a huge charge, but if they had put a compamy name/logo in a prodominant position on the clothes it would have been ok.

[fizzwheel]

Originally Posted by enginedriver

My employers won't pay for a laptop which is a bind 'cos I only hit the office every couple of weeks so need to be able to work remotely.

Why wont they pay for a laptop for you, that sounds bl**dy ridiculous...

Personally no way would I shell out for a laptop that I only used for work.

Originally Posted by TSM

A freind i know used to work in the department that delt with thoes tax issues. They went into one company and saw they bought a load of clothes and marked it an tax decutable thing because it was for work, but when the looked at the clothing and saw that it did not have work tags on it they said that it was possable that the clothes could be used outside of work and so they slapped them with a huge charge, but if they had put a compamy name/logo in a prodominant position on the clothes it would have been ok.

Different rules apply to clothing designed for work