Share this content
0
530

Income from home used for photoshoot

Is income for a photoshoot property income and to be shared by owners

Didn't find your answer?

Search AccountingWEB

One client has just mentioned he has received income last year from using home as a photography shoot location.

He has assumed that as he arranged it it would be just his income.

My understanding is that this would be income from property and shared by the owners.

Also would rent a room relief be available on this income?

 

Replies

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
22nd Jan 2019 17:12

hugogod wrote:

Also would rent a room relief be available on this income?

I think the relief is quite broadly drafted but it's worth having a look at the precise wording of the legislation.

Thanks (0)
avatar
23rd Jan 2019 06:31

Is your client one of the owners? Are any of the (other) owners expecting to be paid?

We need more too to comment on rent-a-room. Take AA's advice to see what the requirements are and come back with any resulting questions.

Thanks (0)
avatar
24th Jan 2019 17:43

I also think it would be hard to prove that it was not rent a room because in effect it is temporary use of a room in your house for a fee that does not exceed the set limits.

there's an old article here about location and property

https://www.boodlehatfield.com/the-firm/articles/renting-out-property-in...

Thanks (0)
By DJKL
to C Graham
23rd Jan 2019 12:16

I would guess film crew had run of whole property not just a distinct part, and likely had it for a precise time period.

We have done some leasing to film companies over the years, albeit mainly commercial property, props storage facility re North & South and bits and pieces re the original John Hannah Rebus productions with Clerkenwell Films.

Whilst we did not let them flats, as they were all tenanted, we did put them in touch with out tenants some of whom obliged, so one of our flats does feature in a Rebus film. The film company took over the entire flat, they had exclusive use for the period (cables trailing etc would be a health and safety issue if owners got to remain) accordingly I would be dubious if Rent a Room was on point but possibly, re certain forms of lease/licence, it could be, the devil is surely in the actual detail.

p.s. From my experience Film companies always have written documentation re such arrangements, I would check this to see what it says re use and exclusive use.

[All part of my Rebus connections- Ian Rankin was two years ahead of me in the English Department at Edinburgh University-I do not remember him nor I expect him me -and my then downstairs neighbour's daughter, Clare McCarron ,played Angie, the prostitute Rebus is fond of who ends up in the mortuary in the first film made, Black & Blue)]

Thanks (0)
avatar
23rd Jan 2019 15:39

There is a lack of clarity in the question. Who is your client, and what are his rights vis a vis "the owners". If he has a lease, then you will have to look at its terms to answer the question.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By hugogod
24th Jan 2019 07:47

Thanks you for replies.

The client is an individual person who owns the home with his spouse used for the photoshoot.
So the question is whether the income has to be divided between the spouses as it is income from property.

Thanks (0)
avatar
24th Jan 2019 13:15

1. When you can use the Rent-a-Room Scheme
You can use the scheme if:

you let a furnished room to a lodger
your letting activity amounts to a trade, for example, if you run a guest house or bed and breakfast business, or provide services, such as meals and cleaning

I would think that by definition you are providing a service using your home (ie location for film/tv/photography) and therefore the income (split between homeowners) up to £7500 would be exempt.

full link here
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/rent-a-room-for-traders-hs223...

Thanks (0)
avatar
to C Graham
24th Jan 2019 14:11

Sorry, but that’s just ridiculous. You think it’s trading income?

Thanks (1)
avatar
to Tax Dragon
24th Jan 2019 17:47

Providing a service. I know plenty of people who make a living from hiring out their property for shoots. Why ridiculous. Same for those doing AirBNB. They advertise through a portal and declare any income - and pay no tax if it is under the threshold currently set. If its ok for Airbnb then what is the difference - its a short letting/use of your home

Thanks (0)
avatar
to C Graham
24th Jan 2019 18:39

Well at least argue from the legislation, rather than by making fatuous comparisons with entirely different scenarios.

I'll make your case for you. The legislation says:

An individual has rent-a-room receipts for a tax year if the receipts are in respect of the use of furnished accommodation in a residence in the United Kingdom or in respect of goods or services supplied in connection with that use.

Note that the supply of services must be in connection with the use of furnished accommodation. Your comment was ridiculous because it asserted that the provision of the property itself is a service. That's just tosh.

Had you said that the receipts were in respect of the use of furnished accommodation (full-stop), then I would have agreed with you that the wording of the legislation was really pretty poor. You would have added, of course, that any claim to relief would have to be accompanied by a WSN saying that the claim departed from HMRC's clear guidance that "the use of furnished accommodation" meant "the use as accommodation".

HMRC adds: "Consequently, even if an entire residence, or part of a residence, is used as trade or business premises and payments are made in respect of that use, we take the view that rent-a-room relief will not be due. The payments will not have been made in respect of the use of living accommodation as such."

But you didn't say any of that.

You will note, incidentally, that HMRC's view would, quite rightly, permit Airbnb but, rightly or wrongly (and subject to additional information), deny the photoshoot.

Extracts are from ITTOIA s786 and PIM4002.

Thanks (0)
avatar
to Tax Dragon
24th Jan 2019 20:24

If you were not so hellbent on criticising my post you'd not misinterpret it. I did not say it was the same as treating it as a business premises or an office run from your house. Short term and non-continuous letting of furnished room/s in return for payment is not running a business or office from home. It is the effect of receiving payment purely for the ad hoc letting of your personal home to another party.

As with AirBNB the agencies take the bookings for location houses and deal with payments and the user . You will offer them use of your property for an agreed period and the agency will take their cut. Where's the difference. HMRC agreed to allow AirBNB under the same rules.

It is the householder who declares the income under the scheme and the HMRC wording does not specify that the householder is limited as to the services that can be offered in letting out their room/rooms.

It could be seen as a loophole but its the job of HMRC to word rules in such a way that there is no scope for misinterpretation. Hence the original post question!

I also quote from your extract. PIM4002

it states...

'The dictionary meaning of ‘accommodation’ is ‘lodgings’ or ‘a place to live’ and in our opinion, the normal unqualified meaning of ‘accommodation’ is ‘living accommodation’

Normal unqualified meaning!
In our opinion!

this is simply NOT clear guidance.

If HMRC want to be specific, then they simply need to specify clearly and not choose wording that is ambiguous and based on opinion rather than fact.

Actually accommodation has two meanings in the dictionary, both of which are 'normal' and one of those is to provide for a need or want. Both are also equally qualified and acceptable as definitions in this context since the way the rules are worded means you can apply it either way.

Your aggressive tone of reply and choice of wording suggests you have another agenda - not simply to impart friendly knowledge, experience and advice but to bash down anyone whom you might disagree with.

You chose your quotes specifically to contradict my point, but if you had been more objective, you might also have picked up on the other flawed extracts and given a more balanced approach to the debate.

I am always happy to accommodate new ideas or learn from someone who has expert knowledge but in this case, I would reiterate that the RAR wording legislation is open to interpretation. It does not provide for specific situations that would forbid the use of the scheme in that particular circumstance as it has say, with the running of an office which is clearly defined as not allowable.

Thanks (0)
avatar
to C Graham
24th Jan 2019 21:26

No other agenda. Just January stress.

The legislation is poorly worded. I said that. HMRC admits as much. But HMRC's interpretation is not clear. And I would not want to defend a position contrary to that guidance based on the claim that letting a house is providing a service - which was your opening bid.

Thanks (0)
Share this content