Capital allowances on paintings

Capital allowances on paintings

Didn't find your answer?

I've seen contradictory suggestions. I'd have thought unless high value paintings that were obviously acquired as investments, the answer should be yes?
bc

Replies (5)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
By Taxi
12th Dec 2007 14:28

Does the trade need to have an attractive setting or theme or am
If, so, and paintings part of this, they may well be part of the decor, and CAs due.

If they are just decorating the boardroom or an office or whatever then not classed as part of the setting and so no CAs.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By AnonymousUser
12th Dec 2007 13:54

Paintings
You will find CIR v Scottish & Newcastle Breweries Ltd., HL1982,55 TC 252
and also Yarmouth v France CA 1887 give guidance.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By AnonymousUser
12th Dec 2007 18:33

Thanks but..........
The paintings would be purely decorative, in the office. I'm not altogether clear why that should prevent them having a trade purpose. All sorts of allowable expenditure in an office has a purpose that is partly or mainly decorative: decoration, obviously, but also carpets (not strictly necessary, after all) etc. An employer will have difficulty in attracting or retaining staff if offices are not pleasant places to be, and an office that is pleasantly decorated may also impress potential or existing customers. Of course, if there is specific authority for denying capital allowances for paintings, then my client is stuck with it, but if not then I feel there is a good argument that these have a trading purpose.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
13th Dec 2007 08:47

Does this help?
http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/camanual/CA21130.htm

This outlines the fact that a painting in an office will not be treated as plant (in most circumstances) because it becomes part of the place in which you conduct your trade not with which you conduct your trade.

CAA2001 S23 will catch it as well.

Carpets (unless moveable) are also not plant as you do not need to have a carpet to perform that trade in the same way that a court found that you do not need lights - you could sit next to a window!

Thanks (0)
avatar
By AnonymousUser
16th Dec 2007 20:05

Thanks Gary. I'm still not 100% convinced about the legal position -- I don't altogether see how paintings fit into ss 21 and 22. But the advice to Inspectors seems crystal clear, even if its legal basis is less so.

Thanks (0)