My client is a radio presenter and DJ. He has a problem with polyps in his nose and needs surgery to relieve the condition. As we all know he faces a very long wait to have this done on the NHS.
The problem is that the condition is seriously affecting his speech. As his voice is his meal ticket does anyone think the costs of a private operation would be tax deductable? He will go ahead if he thinks he will get tax relief - but will wait for NHS if not!
Should I write to HMRC for their 'approval' first?
Elf
Replies (9)
Please login or register to join the discussion.
Personally I think you have answered your own question
"He will go ahead if he thinks he will get tax relief - but will wait for NHS if not!"
If he will continue to work while waiting for the operation on the NHS then it would definitely not be allowed.
I agree with the above response...
... but you might want to take a look at the Parsons FTT case, as well as Prince v Mapp 46 TC 169.
There is an argument for tax relief in the sense that it is not necessary for health (he could wait) but like cosmetic surgery it improves his ability to get and retain work. I would be inclined to claim on the "cosmetic" status of the operation.
George has changed his mind! :) (slightly)
I don't think Parsons is all that relevant now. Parsons had a private op (necessary for his self-employment as a stunt man, but otherwise not necessary) that he could have had on the NHS, but would have had to have waited, which would have damaged his business. It's Prince v Mapp that's the key.
I actually agree with sijolees that the appropriate angle for a self-employed radio presenter/DJ would be to argue down the route referred to in the final paragraph of BIM50160 that the operation is only necessary for the furtherment of the business.
Harry Prince would have been able to claim the costs of his surgery if it hadn't been for the fact that he not only played his guitar as a trade, but also as a personal hobby.
It's the purpose of the expenditure that's important. If there's no private purpose (as with the presenter's teeth in the example in BIM50160), then the expenditure is incurred wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the trade.
Once you have an allowable purpose, the quantum of the expense isn't of any relevance. It's perfectly acceptable to fly first class (or have the operation done privately) even though economy class (or having it done on the NHS) is cheaper (or even free). There's a case on the point somewhere, but I can't find it. Anyone?
So if the only reason our self-employed radio presenter/DJ wanting his polyps removed is so that he sounds better on the radio and gets more work then it's an allowable expense. I do rather suspect that it's not the only reason though.
However, none of that may be relevant, as we all seem to have made one BIG assumption. We've all assumed that this radio presenter/DJ is self-employed.
In my experience radio presenters are employees, for whom there's then the further requirements that the expense should be necessary to the employment (ie that anyone doing the job would need to incur the expense) and that the expense is incurred in the performance of the duties of the employment.
Hell's going to freeze over before an employee can claim this sort of medical expense as an employment expense, quite frankly.
So let's start over. Come on OP. Which is it? Self-employed radio presenter? or employed?
polyps
As he uses his speach for non business activity one would think he can not claim a private operation cost as tax deductable. But if his consultant can confirm that as he has to speak much more than an ordinary person, if this overdrive in speach has caused the problem then I would give it a go and claim it as a tax deductable expense on the premice that his business ocupation caused the health problem.