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?
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.
Related Topics
-
Gifts of shares to children: direct or via a trust?
You want to give away some shares in your company to help provide an income for your children. Is it better to make a direct gift to them or should you transfer the shares to a trust with your children as beneficiaries?
-
Are work-related benefits for disabled persons tax free?
A loyal employee has suffered a disability and needs special equipment to do her job. If she also uses the equipment in her personal life, will it count as a taxable benefit for her?
-
Were capital losses deductible for income tax?
The First-tier Tribunal (FTT) recently considered if an individual was entitled to tax relief for losses when a company he invested in went bust. It ought to have been simple but a refinancing deal complicated matters. What did the FTT decide?