No mate, I am a chartered accountant, I just wanted clarification on the point (this is what this forum is for) as I know the Revenue have changed their guidance and interpretations on a few things benefit-related in recent years.
Why would anyone pose as an accountant? It's hardly up there with rockstar, is it?
We run a tech startup around computer security and software development. Hacker vs. accountant - take your pick...bearing in mind the two owners earn more than both of us, combined. Posing as an accountant - get a grip mate. Off you pop to watch Netflix by yourself.
Indeed, not significant. 12 hour days are worked, and people whose job is highly technical computer work do not tend to spend much time on computers as leisure time :)
"An exempt benefit can't be a trivial benefit" - I know, I see what you mean about this now. If a BIK is exempt, it's exempt, and any discussion on triviality is then invalid and irrelevant.
Haha! I used to live in Hoxton. Not me we are talking about here, though :)
Can I simplify and just reason: company cost, for something provided to the employee for the purpose of the job, reasonable and small personal use, therefore not taxable as a benefit-in-kind?
My answers
Thank you sir.
Really? You can't move for accountants around here ;)
All good banter, in any case!
No mate, I am a chartered accountant, I just wanted clarification on the point (this is what this forum is for) as I know the Revenue have changed their guidance and interpretations on a few things benefit-related in recent years.
Why would anyone pose as an accountant? It's hardly up there with rockstar, is it?
We run a tech startup around computer security and software development. Hacker vs. accountant - take your pick...bearing in mind the two owners earn more than both of us, combined. Posing as an accountant - get a grip mate. Off you pop to watch Netflix by yourself.
Indeed, not significant. 12 hour days are worked, and people whose job is highly technical computer work do not tend to spend much time on computers as leisure time :)
"An exempt benefit can't be a trivial benefit" - I know, I see what you mean about this now. If a BIK is exempt, it's exempt, and any discussion on triviality is then invalid and irrelevant.
I think that answers the question then. Thanks!
Dave
Haha! I used to live in Hoxton. Not me we are talking about here, though :)
Can I simplify and just reason: company cost, for something provided to the employee for the purpose of the job, reasonable and small personal use, therefore not taxable as a benefit-in-kind?
Thanks,
Dave