Share this content
63

Are flights P11D benefit re networking golf trip?

Spain golf trip; 3 day network with suppliers/customer ;Co pay flights/accom. Is it a P11D benefit?

Didn't find your answer?

Several employees are expected (it's not quite mandatory - would it make a difference if it was?) to go on the trip with employees from other companies across the industry.  Relationships are formed and business/deals may come from it. The individuals pay for their 3 days of golf fees, and any food and drink over the standard travel expenses allowance.  My company pays for the flights & hotel costs of our attendees circa £1,000 each.  

Should this be treated as a benefit in kind?

In case it's relevant a couple of the employees do not actually play golf and wait around for everybody to get back  and join them for the networking meeting, meal and bar crawl.

I'm telling them (one of whom is my boss) that we are obliged to put the company costs on their P11D's - but it's not gone down well.  Would really appreciate any help with this.

Thanks in advance.

Replies (63)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
By Paul Crowley
19th Jul 2020 20:12

You are correct
But Boss takes the risk and very unlikely that HMRC will ever know. Provided that Boss accepts that it is his problem and can somehow defend his decision to ignore what you have advised

Thanks (2)
Replying to Paul Crowley:
avatar
By Ancient Mariner
19th Jul 2020 22:33

Thanks very much for such a speedy reply... on a Sunday too!
Would it make any difference if the trip was clearly mandatory? I know several people going on the trip who would rather not, they see it as purely work. It seems harsh they have to pay for the privilege too. Is that irrelevant in HMRC’s eyes?

Thanks (0)
My photo
By Matrix
19th Jul 2020 23:42

You seem to have made the assumption that it is staff entertaining. If it is a networking event then it could well be business entertaining.

Thanks (1)
Replying to Matrix:
avatar
By the_drookit_dug
20th Jul 2020 01:33

Agreed - likely client entertaining. No BIK, corporation tax add back though.

Thanks (1)
Replying to Matrix:
avatar
By Ancient Mariner
20th Jul 2020 07:56

Many thanks for the reply, I appreciate you taking the time. Truth is, I would rather treat it as business entertaining. The invoice for the flights and accommodation are through a “golf travel” company which I think would stick out like a sore thumb in a future HMRC inspection, we’ve never had one yet. In such a case, I don’t want it to come back and bite the company (and therefore me) re shortfall of income tax & NI, penalties and interest.
Any tips re how to position it as business rather than staff entertaining?

Thanks (0)
Replying to Ancient Mariner:
avatar
By Ancient Mariner
20th Jul 2020 08:01

Would it actually help the business entertaining argument if the golf fees for our employees were also paid by our company too?

Thanks (0)
Replying to Ancient Mariner:
My photo
By Matrix
20th Jul 2020 08:33

If it is a networking event, then why would you treat it differently from a local networking event?

Gather all the facts, research the treatment, document in case of HMRC enquiry, advise your boss of the costs/risks of getting it wrong. Recommend to him getting an external opinion if necessary.

Thanks (1)
Replying to Matrix:
avatar
By Ancient Mariner
20th Jul 2020 12:45

Thanks Matrix. It is a networking event from the point of view that attendees would rather not be there and it does add value to the business, but wouldn't the fact it's in sunny Spain and golf is involved colour HMRC's view?

My boss was invited by a supplier to attend the Belgian Formula #1 Grand Prix last year. He despises motor racing but reluctantly attended for "the relationship". Following our golf trip discussion, he has said "you'll want that on my P11D too?".
I suggested HMRC may well see it like that but I'm less concerned as it's not our company paying for it - and the risk of penalty interest lies with him & the supplier. Do you think that's fair comment?

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Paul Crowley
20th Jul 2020 01:54

Not specifically mentioned but is company paying for all attendees not just the company employees?

I read this as saying the company pays for employees. If paying for everyone from other companies then I would agree business entertaining.

Thanks (2)
Replying to Paul Crowley:
My photo
By Matrix
20th Jul 2020 07:18

So if a client sent staff to a networking event in London you would treat the travel and accommodation as staff entertaining?

Thanks (1)
Replying to Matrix:
avatar
By Paul Crowley
20th Jul 2020 09:45

If it was three days long and the main event was three days of golf, the golfing part being paid for by entrants to the golfing competition, I would prefer to be on the HMRC side of any argument concerning its status.
Networking events tend to be organised to be a bit more conference based.

This sounds more like a "jolly" being pushed on the reluctant of which I would be one. I would be taking a couple of books and attending the one meeting a day as being the only business relevant item, Even then I would probably be expected to hear about golf and pretend I care.

Golf, meeting, meal, pub crawl.

The other consideration is whether it is team building.

Thanks (2)
Replying to Paul Crowley:
avatar
By Ancient Mariner
20th Jul 2020 11:52

Thanks Paul, I can see HMRC viewing it as a jolly but it does cement business relationships and create new ones. It is very useful for gathering commercial information and adds value to our business.

Would it help if the company pays for the golf?
What about recording minutes or formalising notes of the post-golf meetings?

I hear you on pretending to care about the golf :).

Thanks (0)
Replying to Ancient Mariner:
avatar
By Paul Crowley
20th Jul 2020 12:16

It does sort of suggest golf is a choice if employees are expected to pay

There is not usually a seperate fee for conferences at conference networking events. Conference is main event with networking an added extra.
Challenging to suggest the sole purpose of foreign holiday is 2 maybe 3 one hour networking opportunities.

Keep records is always best, collect a set of cards might be useful.
But there is no guaranteed solution

Thanks (2)
Replying to Paul Crowley:
avatar
By Ancient Mariner
20th Jul 2020 07:38

Thanks for the further response. Our company only pays for our employees, not attendees from other companies. Does that make a difference BIK wise?

Thanks (0)
Replying to Ancient Mariner:
avatar
By Paul Crowley
20th Jul 2020 09:55

Do not remember the case name, but a firm of solicitors acted for themselves and pretty much tested all versions of going away for conference jollies, meeetings with meals etc.
HMRC had a field day.
The result is that what were the grey areas all turned black.

Even they did not try a three day golfing competition.

Thanks (2)
avatar
By whitevanman
20th Jul 2020 10:28

As always seems to happen, there is a shortage of background facts, so a definitive answer is not possible. That said I would make a couple of comments:
Even if something is classed as "entertaining" (and disallowed for CT) does not mean it is not also taxed as a benefit. All depends on the precise facts.
Secondly, where there can be shown to be mixed use, it is possible to apportion some costs. You have however chosen those (flights and accommodation) that cannot be so apportioned.
So, as others have said / implied, HMRC's job is made somewhat easier.

Thanks (1)
Replying to whitevanman:
avatar
By Ancient Mariner
20th Jul 2020 12:05

Thanks whitevanman, I appreciate definitive answers are not possible but I do appreciate you taking the time. to reply.
I am disallowing for CT and suggesting to my boss that the company is obliged to report company paid costs on his P11D as a benefit as HMRC would see it as a jolly. He rejects that it is a jolly on the basis he would rather not be there. I can see his point, and I do value my job (it's not quite that bad), so pragmatic suggestions such as apportioning costs are very helpful.
I'm not quite sure which part you're referring to re "HMRC's job is made somewhat easier"?

Thanks (0)
Replying to whitevanman:
avatar
By Anonymous.
20th Jul 2020 12:49

whitevanman wrote:

Even if something is classed as "entertaining" (and disallowed for CT) does not mean it is not also taxed as a benefit. All depends on the precise facts.

If the costs are taxed as a benefit in kind, are they not prima facie remuneration which would be an allowable expense?

Thanks (1)
Replying to Anonymous.:
avatar
By whitevanman
20th Jul 2020 13:50

It all depends. If the employer chooses to pay something as part of the remuneration package it is, generally, allowed for CT but taxed on the individual. In the area of entertaining however, and particularly when considering directors, it may be that the cost is disallowed by statute for CT but it may nonetheless be providing a "benefit" and not be considered "business entertaining" in which case it may, nonetheless be taxed on the recipient director etc.

Thanks (1)
Replying to whitevanman:
avatar
By whitevanman
20th Jul 2020 14:40

It is the job of HMRC to see that the correct tax is paid. If the company pays for something that is clearly "entertaining" or otherwise not allowable, and yet claims the cost, it will be simple for them to disallow (and pursue for penalties). Similarly, if the employer pays a cost that provides a benefit to employees and that benefit is not taxed / correctly returned.
The boss might not like it but tax is not there to keep the boss happy. If he chooses to take a chance by claiming a deduction and not reporting a benefit, that is upto him. You might consider your own position (and I would certainly expect any professional advisers to do so) but as a minimum warn him, in writing, of the possible consequences. That way, when the ordure comes into contact with the fast flowing stream of air, it was not your fault!

Thanks (1)
Replying to whitevanman:
avatar
By Ancient Mariner
20th Jul 2020 15:26

Thanks whitevanman, nice turn of phrase :).
I’m not looking to allow it for CT, my issue is around declaring it or not declaring it on their P11D’s.

And what are the consequences for me if HMRC were to see it as a jolly?

There would be presumably be a class 1a NI liability, but what is the likelihood HMRC stop there? What are the likely penalties?

Could the company become responsible for the income tax? Or would HMRC pursue my boss first?

In the Formula #1 trip paid for by a supplier (example above), am I, as the preparer of P11D’s, obliged to declare any benefit element (If there is one) on his P11D or is the related tax up to him and the supplier?

I appreciate there may not be enough detail of the facts to answer definitively, but any help would be great. I want to be pragmatic but I don’t want it to come back and bite me, particularly if HMRC’s view is easy to predict.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Ancient Mariner:
avatar
By whitevanman
20th Jul 2020 21:41

The problem with this type of question is that the answer depends on a whole lot of facts that we don't have and it is often found that when you provide one piece of information, that gives rise to a number of further questions and so on.
Again I will offer some general observations:
Tax treatment is not a matter of choice. It depends on facts. If an employer meets a cost there is a presumption that this was intended and generally it will be deductible in calculating taxable profits unless it falls foul of some specific, statutory, rule (such as those referred to previously).
As a consequence of meeting that cost, there may be a benefit to the employee etc which falls to be reported and taxed accordingly.
It can happen that an amount is not allowable for CT purposes but is nonetheless taxable on the employee.
In general, entertaining is disallowed for CT purposes and if the cost is genuine, business entertaining, it will not be taxable on the employee. In the case of your golf trip, I rather suspect it may fall foul of this being viewed as not wholly business entertaining. That is supported by the fact that employees are having to meet some costs themselves. But bear in mind that simply changing who pays will not alter the fact that it is not wholly BE.
IF employees were obliged to go, presumably the employer would meet all costs and it is more likely that it would all be BE but the facts you have given do not support this.
As I said previously, you could examine the costs and it may be possible to identify some which are wholly business (assuming it is all considered entertaining) and those costs might be disallowed for CT but not give rise to a taxable BIK. However you cannot apportion a flight and on the facts given, the accommodation cost would also not qualify / be apportioned.
If a BIK is not correctly reported, the employer may be charged penalties for incorrect t P11D's and may be liable in respect of unpaid NIC. Whilst the tax cost falls on the employee (who may, as a result of the employers failure made an incorrect SA) HMRC usually try to get a settlement with the employer to include that tax as, to do otherwise might result in some bad feeling by the employees towards the employer! Strictly, they should not include a directors tax liability (which they should pursue with the director) but they often do.

Finally, as regards the Grand Prix question, I assume all the cost was borne by the third party who issued the invite? To the extent it was, there is no chargeable benefit. If any cost was borne by your company, it is likely to be chargeable but again is fact dependent. Whilst of no concern to you, HMRC would be interested to ensure details were passed to the CT section for the company issuing the invite, to ensure disallowed as BE. That is of course irrelevant if, as seems likely, that company is non-UK resident (Belgian Grand Prix suggests it may be a foreign company).

Thanks (2)
Replying to whitevanman:
avatar
By Ancient Mariner
20th Jul 2020 22:25

Wow whitevanman, that really is beyond the call of duty. Thank you so much for taking so much time out of your day. I think the apportionment argument won’t fly; in this case I think it’s all or nothing. I’m going to put it on his p11d and update my CV (joke, my boss is a good guy). I am so impressed with the contributors on this forum, sincerely.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Ancient Mariner:
avatar
By Tax Dragon
21st Jul 2020 07:28

Ancient Mariner wrote:

I am so impressed with the contributors on this forum, sincerely.

You have to do some sifting, but there is still truth to be found in the replies. (Finally I understand the name of the owners of this site.)

Thanks (1)
avatar
By lesley.barnes
20th Jul 2020 19:21

Lets go back to basics - You mention that employee's from other companies are attending who is responsible for organising this trip overall, is it a trade body? What is the ulimate purpose of this trip, how is it advertised? You mention it is being run by a golfing holiday company and it isn't organised by your company. Is the trip wholly and exclusively for business? Could the 3 day golf fees be the same as memberships and subscriptions? www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/employment-income-manual/eim01060. I'm trying to establish what exactly the intinery of this trip is - the only bit that could possibly relate to work is a networking meeting but that could be anything. To be honest the way you describe it this sounds like an enforced jolly. Does this help at all? www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/employment-income-manual/eim31950.

Thanks (1)
Replying to lesley.barnes:
avatar
By Ancient Mariner
21st Jul 2020 00:59

Lesley, those links look tremendously useful, thank you. I do have what is possibly a rather embarrassing question in this company, so apologies in advance but when the linked Employment Income Manual refers to a “deduction”, it appears to me to be referring to corp tax profits rather than income tax - I think (!) I am only concerned with income tax, or does a “deduction” actually refer to earnings subject to income tax?

To answer your questions: my boss organises the trip, and invites are extended to current and potential suppliers and customers The ultimate purpose is to build relationships, share ideas and make deals. My boss books it through a golf travel company, I think they organise the hotel and the golf courses and my boss books and pays for everyone’s flights including third party suppliers/ customers. They pay him directly. He then instructs the golf travel company to raise an invoice specifically to cover the costs for our company employees attending. My boss then reclaims this element through expenses.
I suspect I’m not the first person to lose this argument but isn’t building business relationships through golf wholly and exclusively for business?

It’s difficult to say what the itinerary of the trip is at this stage as the trip is in October, but my boss will broadly decide on golf groupings such that out company employees can get the widest spread of cover across the industry. Our employees will never play with a colleague. They’ll play golf but discuss business too.
When finished it’s back to the hotel, get changed and then a conference meal framed around whatever market related subjects we decide on. Presentation followed by Q&A and discussion.

After the meal, most people, but not all, gather for a social drink/ bar crawl. Repeat x 3. It doesn’t sound like a benefit to me, but I’m not a golfer nor a drinker and I’m not terribly sociable either ;). Is it possible for a round of golf in Spain to be deemed a non CT deductible business expense that is not a BIK?

Thanks (0)
Replying to Ancient Mariner:
avatar
By whitevanman
21st Jul 2020 10:11

The bit of the EIM you were linked to talks about employees who incur costs on a conference etc and who might then be entitled to a deduction in calculating their tax for the expense incurred. It is unlikely this would extend to the cost of a round of golf or drinks etc as in your case.
From the additional information provided it seems clear that the boss is a golfer who organises the trip because he likes golf in Spain and it is an opportunity to develop relationships. Hence not a wholly business purpose. Put it on the P11D and tell the boss it will cost a lot more if it is not correctly dealt with (penalties can be as much as the tax unpaid and the penalty for an incorrect P11D can be £3,000 for each incorrect return).

Thanks (1)
Replying to whitevanman:
avatar
By Tax Dragon
21st Jul 2020 10:23

It's an expense payment - so straight into Pt3 Ch3, no? OP, see esp s72(1).

OP, s72(2) answers confirms whitevanman's answer to your "deduction" question. And s72(3) is what your boss needs to work through to see whether he has a tax bill. (Gut says he will have.)

And of course it's not business entertaining, so what's with disallowing it in the CT comp?

Thanks (1)
Replying to Tax Dragon:
avatar
By whitevanman
21st Jul 2020 13:04

I think the BE references came before we were told everyone was paying for themselves! Sadly reflects the norm!

Thanks (1)
Replying to whitevanman:
avatar
By Ancient Mariner
21st Jul 2020 13:24

Yes, apologies. The facts haven’t crystallised yet as the trip is in October. I believe the third parties will reimburse my boss, but I am making an assumption.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Ancient Mariner:
avatar
By Tax Dragon
21st Jul 2020 13:42

Good news: I would suggest that the reimbursements by third parties probably don't come within Ch3 and you can ignore them.

I'm not so sure that you can ignore your reporting responsibilities in relation to the Grand Prix though. (Obvs Ch3 is not in point there, but it's an employment-related benefit, no? And the director is your employer's employee, not the third party's.)

Regarding my "challenge" below, I haven't looked/thought, but I should imagine that you might need to replicate the analysis in the NIC legislation. There the liabilities are real.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Paul Crowley
21st Jul 2020 12:11

If this was mine
1 Le mans. Not your problem, should be business entertaining in other company.
2 Golf, booked through golf holidays.com sounds more like a jolly if employees are contributing.
I would claim CT tax relief (being staff remuneration) but put on P11d and use the CT relief to adequately put the impressed staff in a less worse position.
Difficult to defend the "nobody wants to go" position on a Spanish holiday.
Quite clearly if everyone hates Spanish holidays why is your company forcing them all to go? If they all hate it holiday organiser needs a serious rebuke.

Thanks (2)
avatar
By lesley.barnes
21st Jul 2020 09:49

I would be really uncomfortable with this set up if I was asked by a client to advise. The boss is organising and paying for everything. The customers and suppliers that are invited then pay the boss for "everything" I'm assuming by this you mean the suppliers then reimburse the Company for flights, golf, food and accomodation? The Company is then invoiced for the cost of the employees by the golf company and these are reclaimed through expenses? Whose expenses?
Why are the suppliers/customers paying for their own travel etc when your boss has invited them to essentially do business? Wholly and exclusively for business - I don't think this holds water if it isn't business entertainining?
So are we now saying that the only people the company is paying for is their own employees and no one else? Employee entertainment?
I would say that the whole trip, flights, accomodation, etc- not just the golf costs are staff entertaining and should be Corporation Tax deductable as staff renumeration but shown on the individuals P11d.
I'm not sure if there is any VAT involved in this set up you would need to check the various invoices between the company and the attendees that are reimbursing the cost of the trip back to the company etc.
Perhaps your boss needs to rethink his golfing break?

Thanks (1)
Replying to lesley.barnes:
avatar
By Ancient Mariner
21st Jul 2020 10:55

Thank you Lesley, this is very good of you. To try and answer your questions; the suppliers/customers see it as mutually beneficial and pay for all their own costs. My boss has booked the flights and hotels through the golf company and paid for it personally (furloughed staff meant it was just easier this way).

The suppliers/customers have reimbursed my boss directly, our employees have not. My boss has reclaimed, through expenses, an invoice from the golf travel company which relates only to the costs for our employees (flights & hotel) ie our company has paid only for our employees flights and hotels. The golf fees are payable in Spain in October - at this stage I’m not certain if our company will pay the golf fees for our employees or not (this discussion may determine that).

We are not vat registered so don’t reclaim any vat.

What are the best options to avoid the costs going on a P11D?
Would a PSA (PAYE Settlement Agreement) be the only option?

As for rethinking the trip, I don’t think that’s viable, I just want to best understand the most pragmatic treatment. My boss sincerely sees the trip as important for business and a definite value add. I believe the suppliers/customers have a similar view.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Tax Dragon
21st Jul 2020 11:06

A point for discussion: whose P11d(s)?

As I note above, s72(1) makes the whole cost initially earnings for the director, subject to a deduction. But other staff are receiving a benefit.

(Could be that PSA avoids that issue, if it's available, as it removes the entries from the P11d(s).)

Thanks (0)
Replying to Tax Dragon:
avatar
By Ancient Mariner
21st Jul 2020 11:20

Thanks Tax Dragon, I’m concerned I’m testing people’s patience now, so I appreciate you sticking with it :).

Re whose P11d’s: the attendees from our company, some of whom are directors, some are employees.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Ancient Mariner:
avatar
By Tax Dragon
21st Jul 2020 12:07

That's common sense. My challenge (to anyone that cares to engage with this) is to show it's also correct. As I said, s72(1) initially(*) puts the whole cost on the director's P11d, because the whole payment is being made to him. (That does not mean, by the way, that it does not (also) have to go on the other participants' P11ds.)

(*) by which I mean "subject to other sections that override it".

Thanks (1)
Replying to Tax Dragon:
avatar
By Paul Crowley
21st Jul 2020 13:33

So not really the question first posed
All sorted and organised and paid for by the person who really does not want to go on a golfing holiday.
Now the poor fellow gets the entire BIK as well.

Thanks (2)
Replying to Paul Crowley:
avatar
By Tax Dragon
21st Jul 2020 13:55

If the question has changed, it's with the emergence of facts, not because I changed it. And if the poor fellow gets (taxed on) the entire BIK, it's probably because no-one has properly engaged with the tax legislation.

In case you hadn't realised, I'm getting a bit tired of the answer-by-consensus approach that (IMHO) now dominates this forum. When I was a trainee (with a bunch of trainees), any question asked would get us turning straight to the legislation. In this forum, "legislation" is almost a dirty word. [Exaggeration alert, but you get my point.]

Thanks (0)
Replying to Tax Dragon:
avatar
By Ancient Mariner
21st Jul 2020 13:41

Thanks TD. Would it make any difference to putting all these reimbursed expenses on my bosses P11d (for our staff’s flights and hotels) if the payments were made directly by the company? Presumably just each individual’s benefit would go on each individual’s p11d ?

The golf company’s invoice for our employees’ flights and hotels is addressed to our company but has been paid for by my boss’s personal credit card - he used the wrong card and should have used his company credit card. He’s therefore been reimbursed. Seems harsh to put the whole invoice on his p11d?

I’m also thinking about future payment of the golf fees for our staff.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Ancient Mariner:
avatar
By Tax Dragon
22nd Jul 2020 09:09

Ancient Mariner wrote:

Thanks TD. Would it make any difference to putting all these reimbursed expenses on my bosses P11d (for our staff’s flights and hotels) if the payments were made directly by the company? Presumably just each individual’s benefit would go on each individual’s p11d ?

The golf company’s invoice for our employees’ flights and hotels is addressed to our company but has been paid for by my boss’s personal credit card - he used the wrong card and should have used his company credit card. He’s therefore been reimbursed.

If it makes any difference to the tax (or NIC) payable, then there's something wrong with our tax (or NIC) law. It's possible it makes a difference to the way the payment should be reported. Compare my reply to your earlier comment that the reimbursement was from third parties. I said that they were therefore outwith s72/Ch3. Now, since you're saying the whole reimbursement is from the employer(*), my advice is the whole payment is (initially, as previously defined) within s72 and may need to go on the director's P11d.

But whatever the reporting position (and I haven't worked that out), it doesn't mean he's taxable on the whole payment. As someone noted earlier, s72 permits for a deduction. Your man is almost certainly due a deduction.

(*) I am unclear how the position vis-à-vis past events can be evolving. I can forgive you for not knowing what is going to happen, but you really ought to be able to be clear about what has happened. Drip feeding facts (water water everywhere nor any drop to drink) is bad enough. Changing facts as we go on is too much for me. Dragon hath her penance done(**), [and ev'rybody else too for enduring Dragon's ramblings]. I'm out.

(**) There is rime and reason to my using this expression (among others). You appear unfamiliar with the poem. Sad. But you might enjoy this version https://youtu.be/t7zk4as9kzA

Thanks (1)
Replying to Tax Dragon:
avatar
By Ancient Mariner
22nd Jul 2020 09:00

Thanks again TD, I know you’re out and apologies for testing your patience but let me try and be clearer about the who has paid who. My boss has booked flights and hotel through a golf travel company for all 24 attendees. He paid for all 24 attendees using his personal credit card. He got the travel company to raise an invoice to our company for the 8 attendees from our company. This invoice is the only element for which my boss has been reimbursed by the company. I believe the balance will be reimbursed by the third party attendees.

As for your poetic olde English turn of phrase - I’ve been enjoying it, but I’m unsure what it’s got to do with me being an aged supporter of Grimsby Town FC? (*)

(*) joke - I enjoyed your references & beginning to understand the agony of penance first hand. Thanks for the Maiden too.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Tax Dragon:
avatar
By whitevanman
21st Jul 2020 22:10

Sorry TD but cannot take up the challenge, not least because we do not have the facts and what we do have is contradictory.
I will briefly address the S72 point.
The facts as we now have them suggest the "Boss" made the booking on behalf of the company and the invoice was raised in the company name. The "boss" went to pay but inadvertently used his own CC instead of the company's. The company then reimbursed him.
If this is an accurate, factual, description of things, the reimbursement is not within S72. It is not a payment in respect of expenses. The HMRC guidance contains an example where the employee pays for stamps and gets reimbursed out of petty cash but I think the principle is the same.
But as I say, we don't have all the facts and I am rather sceptical about what we do have (sorry AM, not your fault).
Just to follow your "challenge". If the payment was within S72 the "boss" might be able to claim a deduction for a large part. Completely unconnected, the arrangements would mean the company had borne the cost and it would follow that the company had provided whatever benefits to the other employees so I see no reason why those should not also go on P11D's for said employees.

Edit
Please ignore my comments about the S72 example as I have just read it again and am not sure I have it right. I think the example assumes a payment using petty cash rather than own money (see EIM01110).

Thanks (1)
Replying to whitevanman:
avatar
By Ancient Mariner
22nd Jul 2020 09:14

hi whitevanman, hopefully my recent response to TD above helps address your cause for being sceptical? Sincere thanks for the help though.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Tax Dragon
21st Jul 2020 16:03

The mere mention of legislation seems to have become an albatross around this thread's neck. Sorry, Ancient Mariner. I knew it'd stoppeth one of three of the subsequent contributions; I didn't mean to kill them all. (The dragon hath penance done, And penance more will do... she'll see if she can answer her own questions. Later though. There's work afoot.)

Thanks (1)
Replying to Tax Dragon:
avatar
By lesley.barnes
21st Jul 2020 16:18

I'm still here TD but at the moment I don't know the answer. My problem with the thread is its ever evolving. The gist now seems to be is there anyway of avoiding benefit in kind for the Director and the employees for the golf trip.

AM - just so I get a complete picture how many Director and how many employee's are involved in this trip?

Thanks (1)
Replying to lesley.barnes:
avatar
By Gall17
21st Jul 2020 19:04

Hi Lesley, thanks for sticking in there and I do apologise for the evolving detail.
5 directors and 3 employees from our company. There are 24 attendees in total, so 16 from other firms across the industry.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Gall17:
avatar
By lesley.barnes
22nd Jul 2020 09:32

I too will have to throw the towel in on this one. The Director has mudded the waters completely. Whether he used the wrong card is a moot question - if he had done this surely he would have claimed back the whole amount if the trip was for business purposes. Instead he personally (invoiced?) 16 suppliers to reclaim their part of the trip and received the money personally, then asked the Golfing Holiday Company to invoice his Limited Company just for the Companies part of the trip. The trip is for 5 directors and 3 employees - are the employees related to the Directors? There are people going on the trip who are not golfers and won't be doing any networking during the day from what you've said earlier but will join for dinner and a pub crawl. I honestly can't see why the cost of the whole trip isn't part of this groups renumeration. The question is whether it is all chargeable to the numpty who booked it and claim back expenses or whether because he had an invoice made out to the company from the golf holiday company that is enough to spread the renumeration between the various parties. At this point I have to admit I don't know. Following this treatment through I would suggest that the payment of the golf course fees incurred in Spain should go on the P11D's or be paid personally by the golfers.

(I say invoiced because the suppliers must have needed some record if the were paying out £1000+ for a trip)

Thanks (0)
Replying to lesley.barnes:
avatar
By Ancient Mariner
22nd Jul 2020 12:17

Hi Lesley - you've done more than enough already, thanks very much.
I was thinking of showing my boss this thread to placate him, but not sure if the "numpty" comment will have that effect :))).

Thanks (0)
Replying to lesley.barnes:
avatar
By Ancient Mariner
22nd Jul 2020 12:17

Hi Lesley - you've done more than enough already, thanks very much.
I was thinking of showing my boss this thread to placate him, but not sure if the "numpty" comment will have that effect :))).

Thanks (0)

Pages

Share this content

Related posts