A mate who works in the tax dept at a medium-sized company has apparently just had a query from HMRC about cycle to work.

They have asked how many people have taken up their Bike to Work scheme in the last tax year, and how many bike parking spaces they have available for employees.

Doesn’t take a genius to see where that one is going, does it?

Well – you’re obviously more clever than me. I can’t see what you are driving at.

“driving at” – Clever….! 😉

Tee hee

Doesn’t everyone just lean their bike to work bike against their desk??? After all – they don’t offer free insurance with all these £1k commuters… 😀

But the stipulation is that more than 50% of the bikes mileage is commuting. So, if it does 10 miles and 6 were to and from work, jobs a good ‘un.

who has bike parking spaces? perhaps they’re looking at taxing them as a perk.

Doesn’t take a genius to see where that one is going, does it?

You’re right there! I’m no genius and I can’t see where it’s going.

Oh, wait…

Who cares? Those that took it up got a good deal.

Job done.

Everyone I know that uses C2W are basically exploiting the service. IMO if it goes its no bad thing. I think very few people started cycling to work because of it

pieface +1

The scheme has been effectively dry humped since its inception.

I’m clearly overestimating the intelligence of the average STW forum dweller… 🙂

Say 100 people take a bike on bike to work, but only 10 spaces for bikes then wouldn’t that suggest that most bikes aren’t being used for commuting?

So next thing HMRC come in, does an audit, asks a few questions, find that a significant proportion of the users have bought bikes never used for commuting.

So unless you can demonstrate you have been commuting on the bike then bang goes your tax relief and you get a tax bill for £300 on your “bargin” £1k hardtail.

I know the point of the scheme was a carbon reduction initiative primarily, but surely the health benefits of having more leisure cyclists is still worth having. I accept that most of the bikes have probably sat in sheds and garages since they were bought, but even a small percentage increase in use increases fitness and health, which has to be worth the money.

And they best not stop it before next April 😉

The scheme has been effectively dry humped since its inception.

Post of the day, and I thoroughly agree.

IMO, the £1,000 limit was too high, allowing too many people to buy “nice” bikes, not just commuter bikes.

different take: The employer who signs up to C2W is expected to provide facilities for the cyclists… it may be that they are being checked on to see if those facilities have materialised

The Department of Transport wishes to encourage employers to be more cycle friendly by signing up to the Cycle to Work Guarantee, a five-point plan, covering the following key areas:

* Secure, safe, and accessible bike parking facilities for all staff who want them
* Good quality changing and locker facilities for all staff who want them
* Offset the cost of cycling equipment and save on the tax through the ‘Cycle to Work scheme’
* Bike repair for cyclists on or near site
* Training, reward and incentive programmes to achieve targets for more cycling.

Stu_N – Member
I’m clearly overestimating the intelligence of the average STW forum dweller…

Say 100 people take a bike on bike to work, but only 10 spaces for bikes then wouldn’t that suggest that most bikes aren’t being used for commuting?

No. It would simply indicate that they are not all being used every day and as there is no requirement to do so……

bassspine I like your optimism, but when the govt are scrabbling around for every penny of tax revenue they can get and have increased the funding for anti-avoidance and anti-evasion teams then it’s not going to be about checking whether everyone who got a bike has space in a shelter and a nice big locker….

Hang on, I took the full grand and I spent it on a cross/touring type bike. I ride mountain bikes for fun and I wouldn’t ride on of those to work. I can honestly say 95% of the mileage of that bike has been commuting and the other 5% was helping recover from a nasty shoulder injury.

I like quality bikes and if it had been limited to say £250, which most non cyclists still think is silly money on a bike, then I wouldn’t be riding to work as bikes that cheap don’t feel anywhere near as nice.

I know a lot of people on here have used the scheme differently but I don’t think it’s representative of the scheme overall.

No. It would simply indicate that they are not all being used every day and as there is no requirement to do so……

Well, it could indicate that, but it could equally indicate my hypothesis. I guess HMRC must be thinking that there’s something funny going on…

Well, I cycle to work on either my c2w bike, or my fixie, depending on which one is working on any given day. Occasionally I drive.

If there are people out there who bought a bike on c2w, and then never actually rode them to work (e.g. because the bike was actually a snowboard), or any other bike, then they deserve to pay back to HMRC.

Otherwise the rest of us are just paying higher taxes for people to have nice toys.

There was never any requirement to use the bike, only that 50% of the mileage of the bike was for commuting. The conditions of the scheme could be fulfilled by leaving the bike at home and never using it for a year.

If HMRC don’t think there’s anything funny going on, then they are more stupid than anybody gives them credit for. However, I suspect that proving the terms of the scheme have been broken would cost a lot more than any tax recovered.

Not everyone using the bike to work scheme uses the STW website surprisingly, just because a few people on here claim to be abusing the scheme doesn’t mean its the same right across the board. There are only a small number at my workplace (maybe 10) taking part in the scheme and I’ve seen most of them riding to work at some time, they may not ride every day but that’s not what the scheme says, it says 50% of the bikes use, so if I ride to work on the one sunny day of the summer and keep my bike hung up in the garage for the rest of the year I’ve not broken the rules and I’ve not used the bike parking places in the bike shed much either.
There’s about 30 places in our bike shed, in the summer its full up and overflowing, on night shifts and sometimes in the winter there may only be one or two bikes in there, are you saying that it should be full at all times because the company is taking part in bike to work.

This came up at work yesterday, as HR sent out an email detailing cyclescheme’s options.

One person was very upset that they would have to pay more at the end of the hire period than they had been “promised”, especially as they bought the bike to use the c2w scheme, not to actually cycle to work with.

And they best not stop it before next April +1

There’s a roadrat or similar just waiting for me to order it.

I’m looking forward to HMRC coming down hard and demanding that all people with bikes start registering their commute times. Cue a load of fat nackers having to puff their way in to work over a distance they would never normally ride on a completely innapropriate bike.

Some of us regularly commute on our BTW purchases. The fact that I can race cyclocross on mine is simply a bonus.

I know the point of the scheme was a carbon reduction initiative primarily

Possibly originally, but for the employer there were (and are) big NI contribution savings, because the CTW money comes off gross salary before tax etc. is calculated.

As an aside, since they put the final payment up to represent an appropriate market value for the bike, it’s not great VFM any more; if it saves you 10% you can probably negotiate that from a decent LBS, especially one you’ve had a few bikes from; if not, a lot will chuck in 10% worth of accessories. Also, if you’re on an average salary pension scheme, CTW does have an impact on that.

Andy

Post of the day, and I thoroughly agree.

IMO, the £1,000 limit was too high, allowing too many people to buy “nice” bikes, not just commuter bikes.

For one I conccur with CFH. I think that 700£ would have been enough to buy a bike to cycle to work with. It’s commuting bike right. But then, the scheme shoot itself in the foot with the 50% of the bike use has to be commuting. It’s a bit like allowing personal mileage on police patrol cars or ambulances

It was set up in order to reduce car use, and increase cycling to work, so even if you aren’t using the bike you bought to cycle to work, but are using another, I think you can have a clear conscience.

Also, alot of the bikes bought probably wouldn’t have been bought had it not been for the CTW scheme, therefore rather than costing the government/taxpayer money, we’re actually just helping the bike industry a bit more.

Most people I work with now cycle to work, I think the CTW scheme has helped.

Also

“But then, the scheme shoot itself in the foot with the 50% of the bike use has to be commuting. It’s a bit like allowing personal mileage on police patrol cars or ambulances”

That’s nonsense, that’s like saying you can buy a £700 bike but you can’t ride it unless it’s to/from wrk, you’ll need to get another bike for that! Come off it.

Sorry.

I think that 700£ would have been enough to buy a bike to cycle to work

yeah, it would. But then what about all the lights, lock, helmet, rack, panniers, mudguards, etc. It seems to me that limit was set so that people could get kitted out properly in one go.

if HMRC have a clampdown then those who bought a bike on the ‘bike to work’ scheme and don’t bike to work on it can’t really be that surprised if they have to pay the tax on it. worst is they’ll have to do self cert or their tax code will be changed.

if they wanted to do it properly they could have zero VAT rated bike frames and components and passed the lost revenue onto cars VAT/road fund licence

[edited for language and work content about HR department organisational capability]

Hey guys, let’s hope for the sake of all of us who have used C2W to ride to work all or some of the time (that’s excluding the cynics, misanthropes and anti-statist goons who use this site as their own personal testing ground) that HMRC are not reading these threads right now and drawing conclusions that we’re all abusing the scheme.

Now that would be a collective ‘own goal’, n’est pas?

Well done to those who have taken up the offer. I would certainly have jumped at the chance had it been available at my workplace.

I was met with the comment from senior management “why can’t you just be normal and come to work in your car like everyone else” (not said in a joking fashion) when simply requesting an area to dry some commuting clothes.

Goodness knows what response I would have got if I’d asked for work to help with buying a bike!

Contrary to what you lot are saying, I’d say 90% of the C2W bikes we sell are genuinely used for commuting. While on here they’re not, STW is a strange cross section of the cycling world.

Most people on C2W now ride to work a lot, and that’s great- previously they’d never have ridden but the opportunity to get a nice bike for cheap has won a lot of new cyclists over. Most of our customers only go for about £500 so nowhere near the full budget. They get a pretty nice bike, get fitter and emissions are reduced. And, interestingly, it’s not all middle class folk out for a good deal- we get a load of people earning very low wages using it as an opportunity to get something nice that will save them a lot of money and get them fit and healthy.

It’d be a shame to see it go, but hey, the Tories have got to be right, haven’t they?

I am not sure C2W is about getting a cheap bike anyway. If you’re a 25% taxpayer, the best you can hope for is that it is an interest free loan to buy a bike (with maybe a 10% saving over MRP). If a 40% taxpayer, you may save a little more, but at the end of the day, you could get an equivalent deal buying last years model or haggling. The initial price makes it look appealing, but the final value part of the arrangement effectively has the ability to kill any saving.

If it gets more people on bikes, then it’s a good thing. Our place has 12,000 employees, and 700 have taken up the scheme in year 1. The bike sheds are definitely more full than they were, even on crappy weather days. So, I would say that the scheme is working to an extent.

In amongst the billionaires stashing their cash away in tax havens, the tradesman doing the bulk of their work for cash & the people on benefits for life: Does anyone seroiusly think the C2W scheme represents a significant dent in the income of the Exchequer? Some people got cheap bikes & saved a few hundred quid: A lot of them probably wouldn’t have bought a bike otherwise. People are whinging about this on a cycling forum. wow

SpokesCycles – Member

It’d be a shame to see it go, but hey, the Tories have got to be right, haven’t they?

Don’t try to make this party political – the clarification by HMRC was nothing to do with the change in government.

Just had my final payment letter – old payment would have been 3%, new is 25%….

…but company is paying the difference plus any added tax liability, so I only pay the 3%!

Of all the people I know who bought a bike on the C2W scheme at our company, (5 I think in my office anyway), none of them use the bike for commuting. None of them even cycle to work. One guy even has a plan. He gets the bike on the C2W scheme, uses it a bit and then sells it after a year. He makes so much profit on the sale that it pays for the bike he buys next year.

Oh there’s lots of examples of mis-use..

The guy who came in with his wife and daughter and wanted a bike for each of them. And who then got irate when we said no.

The multiple “I just want a frame/forks/groupset” attempts.

The snowboard 🙂

But as SpokesCycles says above, the majority are bought by well-intentioned casual- and non-cyclists who want to get a bit fitter and make their commute a bit less costly.