Small cafe had a tiled floor in existence for 10 years.
It carried out a refurb - screeded over the floor and stuck down Karndean tiles (luxury vinyl floor) on top.
Would this be classed as repairs or capital? It's not an exact like for like replacement but just wondered whether it could be argued as a modern equivalent replacement and therefore treated as a repair?
Or are we looking at capital and as it is stuck down then there are no capital allowances available?
Replies (11)
Please login or register to join the discussion.
That's strange, I can't see it as being anything other than a straightforward improvement to the existing functioning floor.
I don't agree with either that it's straightforward. But without seeing exactly what was there before, its condition etc (and knowing nothing about the quality of the new flooring) I'm leaning towards revenue.
I don't know enough about floors to say whether its a modern equivalent.
Was the existing floor considered "luxury" at the time it was put down ? If it was, I'd vote yes. If it wasn't, I'd invite further arguments from the taxpayer.
I think Conn v Robins Bros Ltd is in point. Replacement with modern materials doesn't make the expenditure capital.
Just normal tiling. The floor is 10 years old so there was obvious wear and tear but I am sure it could have lasted longer.
However these LVTs are somewhat easier to clean and maintain hence the replacement.
You're not helping yourself here.