Share this content
0
2393

Tax return for an exotic dancer

Nature of trade classification and travel expenses

Didn't find your answer?

Search AccountingWEB

I realise the implications of Gemma Daniels case and the expenses that can potentially be claimed. However, my questions is regarding the nature of trade classification and the travel expenses. Would really appreciate if somebode can give a bit of guidance please.

1. Client, very understadably, is uncomfortable with entering the naturs of trade as either of "lap dancer, pole dancer, exotic dancer, stripper, etc etc. Can I enter this as an "entertainer". I been told that cannot use the classification "entertainer" in this instance.

2. Client, she, during a lot of the evenings finishes work 4-5am. It is may be uncomfortable or somewhat unsafe for a young girl/lady to travel on her own to a bus stop/train station this early morning. Would HMRC allow for travel/cab expenses on this ground. I realise in Gemma Daniels case judge disallowed travel expenses. However, I am aware that when a female works for a firm e.g. in the city and if she works beyond 9pm, then a lot of the firms pay for the taxi and the firm claims this as an allowabel expenses. Could a club dancer claim travel on the similar basis. I realise getting to club/work place early evening would not be allowed as an expense.

Would appreciate a reply.   

Replies

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
13th Feb 2019 13:44

Do you know why you can't use entertainer? The travel expenses I would say are not allowable because of the Gemma Daniels case. I'm assuming your client is only going to one workplace. I would say that even as an employee if she was working in one location continually she would have a BIK because of the conditions she would have to satisfy for it to be allowable.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Lisa02
to lesley.barnes
13th Feb 2019 13:59

Thank you for the reply Lesley.

I myself think should be able to use word "entertainer" or "entertainment", however, another colleague mentioned cannot. My opinion is that this is an entertainment industry and using the classification "entertainment" is ok. Let HMRC come back. If they later enforce the change then let it be. There is no tax amount implication and hence possibly no penalty.

Re travel, she has only worked in the same location for approx 8 months, plus few other locations few days in this time. She finishes 4,5,6 am and always takes cab home. Gemma Daniels case did not mention late nights travel etc and was purely on the grounds that Gemma worked for one employer, one location over several years, plus it was based on travel home to work, case did not go into timings of travel.

Thanks (0)
13th Feb 2019 13:55

1. Who says she can't use "entertainer" ?

What's wrong with "dancer" ?

Apart from her discomfort in disclosing what she does for a living, what's the importance of this ?

2. I think she's going to have to stand the full cost of her travel, I'm afraid.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Lisa02
to lionofludesch
13th Feb 2019 14:02

She's herself prefers to not to use the word "dancer" or similar etc. I realise travel is a difficult one and she would have to bear the cost. I was just trying to find a justification for claiming.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Lisa02
to Lisa02
13th Feb 2019 14:10

I saw another online thread advising what expenses to claim in the industry, and in there mentioned child care expenses are allowable. Is this correct ?

Thanks (0)
avatar
to Lisa02
13th Feb 2019 14:15

No.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Lisa02
to Wanderer
13th Feb 2019 14:31

Agree, generally child care are not allowed for self-employed (other than Ltd Company employees, under certain conditions).

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Mr_awol
to Lisa02
13th Feb 2019 15:59

Why does she care about the description?

I'd imagine it's a lot more nerve wracking taking your kit off in front of a bunch of lecherous drunken oafs then admitting to doing so.

I haven't had an extensive portfolio of dancers/models/performance artists/etc but have had some as clients before. None of them have been particularly shy or retiring and none have been in any way reluctant to share their occupation with me or anyone else. If anything, they seem to have been quite happy to announce it and wait and see what my reaction was.

Thanks (1)
avatar
13th Feb 2019 14:17

If she is working in a few other locations fora few days at a time these might be classed as itinerant work. You would need to look at Dr Samad Samadian v HMRC to see how your clients case compares.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Lisa02
to lesley.barnes
13th Feb 2019 14:28

I will check, thank you for advising.

Thanks (0)
avatar
13th Feb 2019 14:26

Given the typical clientele, I think "Children's Entertainer" would work perfectly well.

But "entertainer", "performer", it doesn't matter.

The tribunals have lost their way in recent years with travel expenses, but probably not in the Daniels case. If she is travelling to THE place where she sets out her stall, then the travelling costs are not allowable. If she sets out her stall in a number of places, the answer might be different. Individuals should not be required to have the degree of ominpresence that the tribunals have latterly been expecting of them.

Thanks (1)
avatar
By Lisa02
to Vile Nortin Naipaan
13th Feb 2019 14:56

:)
Travel costs seem to be a discussion point with almost all clients, but, yes, it needs to be correct before claiming.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By itp3e
to Vile Nortin Naipaan
15th Feb 2019 12:41

" Registered" sex worker?

Thanks (0)
avatar
By itp3e
to Vile Nortin Naipaan
15th Feb 2019 12:43

" Registered" sex worker?

Thanks (0)
13th Feb 2019 14:39

I would suggest the description is largely irrelevant.

I would make a couple of suggestions to your client, and let them chose it.

On travel, its an "it depends". Normal rules of temporary place of work apply. What is the expectation of the current location of 8 months?

The question of the method or cost of travel is not relevant, it is a question of whether its allowable or not, not if its a bus or a cab.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Lisa02
to ireallyshouldknowthisbut
13th Feb 2019 14:51

8 months in one palace for 2017/18, April 2018 to date another location, in couple of weeks time now leaving the work for a while.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Lisa02
to Lisa02
13th Feb 2019 15:24

I am sorry, but I need to explore travel costs a bit more

"Dr Samadian case where travel was disallowed because it was "regular and predictable" - though that said, Dr Samadian was working at the same place into perpetuity, so longer than 24 months".

My client has worked for 8 months in one place, then current year in another (10 months) and in a week leaving work for at least few month.

Appears travel costs can be claimed under itinerant ?

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Mr_awol
to Lisa02
13th Feb 2019 15:53

Lisa02 wrote:

Appears travel costs can be claimed under itinerant ?

I would say that you would be itinerant if you were dancing at lots of private parties, or were touring and performed at a particular venue for a set run of shows.

If you are just 'working' at a particular club and then happen to decide to move 'jobs' to work elsewhere after a number of months, then not itinerant at all.

Thanks (1)
13th Feb 2019 16:10

I have a couple of this type of client

Dancer is the trade which is what she is, whether it is pole or ballet who actually cares

Expenses will not be allowable she is better off getting staff transport home as must will offer taxis for late night staff

Thanks (2)
avatar
By Lisa02
to Glennzy
13th Feb 2019 16:11

Yes, thank you all.

I've had a go in trying to find a reason to claim travel costs in this specific case but appears cannot. So I accept.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By AWebbie
15th Feb 2019 09:52

How about "Performance Artist"

Thanks (0)
avatar
15th Feb 2019 10:41

What about model as a trade description

Thanks (0)
avatar
to pauljohnston
15th Feb 2019 10:47

Model: 'a small, cheap imitation of the real thing'.
No, I don't think that will go down too well.

Thanks (0)
avatar
to andy.partridge
15th Feb 2019 11:24

"Go down". Don't think I didn't see what you did there.

Thanks (2)
avatar
By Janski
15th Feb 2019 11:09

Surely the job title is irrelevant, as HMRC effectively ignore that and look for the accounts filed to reflect the true circumstances of the actual activity.

And unless the client comes under investigation, it's only HMRC's computer which will see any job title anyway.

Thanks (0)
avatar
16th Feb 2019 07:42

Wasn’t there a documentary about a brothel, on Chanel 4 about 10 yrs ago, in which the Madam (if that’s the right word; I wouldn’t know) said that she put on her SA100 that she was a ‘brothel madam’ and someone from HMRC rang her and asked her to change her occupation description to something else that wasn’t illegal?

Or was that a really weird dream?

Thanks (0)
Share this content