I wouldn't cycle to work on a £1000 brand new bike, odds are it would get stolen.
Maybe at your work but at mine they'd have to break into the building without setting off the alarm that's linked to our control room. Plus it's very low crime around here so not likely to happen.
I once commuted on a £5k DH bike.
Once.
I wouldn't cycle to work on a £1000 brand new bike, odds are it would get stolen.
Like those above I also definitely would.
Iirc there was a friendly quotation page on the c2w site that predicted your payments when you filled in the bike value/ your salary etc. might be a good first start!2nd post has a link.
Moreover it has the answer too - net salary sacrifice on a £1000 voucher, on a 40% tax earner is £48.33/month.
Lifes too short to ride shit bikes.
I really like the Il Pompino! I also like the fact I don't worry about it being scratched / bashed in the very busy bike racks, rusting in the rain, locking it outside the pub / shops on the way home with a £1.99 lock (free with cycling weekly) etc.
In fact most of the Elite cyclists in Cambridge inc ex international pros, seem to ride very tatty town bikes to work etc...
Good for them, I still don't want to 😉
A town bikes not a commuting bike though.
Fine if your commutes short through town and slow in traffic etc how ever i have a decent length commute that i need something solid dependable reasonably quick comfy and most of all , something i want to ride for that distance.
In fact most of the Elite cyclists in Cambridge inc ex international pros, seem to ride very tatty town bikes to work etc...
Hahahaha! Funniest comment I've read in ages.
"Pro's and Elites do it so it must be a good idea"
My commute's only 4km each way. Over the years I've ridden an old MTB, a new MTB, a cx bike, a cargo bike, a custom-framed monstercross bike.
And if you're not using the bike to ride to work for >50% of its annual miles, you're evading tax.
IIRC the rule is "half of the rides".
Not that it matters in practice as it would be incredibly hard to prove when a bike had been used for a non-commuting ride.
Seems like too much hassle to me, done it once, currently ride an evolving beast (commute is bigger than when I did cycle to work) with broken bits being replaced with cheapish hopefully durable bits, and lots of money spent on dynamo lighting.
Isn't the number of people who are perceived by hmrc to be abusing the scheme the reason it costs more than it used to? It's why nice things don't last long.
IIRC the rule is "half of the rides".
It could be.
Not that it matters in practice as it would be incredibly hard to prove when a bike had been used for a non-commuting ride.
It's a difficult one, because you could buy a bike, ride it to work once and then stick it in the garage for a year unused and be within the rules.
But, there are a lot of people clearly taking the piss, and this could lead to the scheme being withdrawn.
Isn't the number of people who are perceived by hmrc to be abusing the scheme the reason it costs more than it used to? It's why nice things don't last long.
No.
But, there are a lot of people clearly taking the piss, and this could lead to the scheme being withdrawn.
That's been said since it started, still going.
That's been said since it started, still going.
For now.
I suspect it's still going, because 40% rate payers do well out of it while it's of no help to those who are genuinely badly off. (Other than helping the availability of second hand bikes.)
I doubt that the 10% are the ones that keep it going.
Was it ever about helping people who are "genuinely badly off"? I thought it was to incentivise and encourage cycling, and it's done, and continues to do, that.
I bought a full sus Kona on the scheme. Commuted on it for 2 weeks in the snow when my road bike would have killed me. Splendid scheme, shame my payments now go on nursery vouchers. 🙄
In fact most of the Elite cyclists in Cambridge inc ex international pros, seem to ride very tatty town bikes to work etc..
Drac,
Laugh all you want, but footflaps is bang on the money there. Cambridge is a nightmare for bikes being stolen, even really, REALLY shit ones. People at work have had 20 quid Halfords rejects stolen despite being locked up and my old bike got swiped from a locked bike shed.
I used to play "Spot the decent bike" when walking through town and realised the futility of it after a few months. With the exception of the occasional hipster riding a Kona fixie, it's just wall to wall junk.
Sorry if that makes me sound snobby. I'm not really, but the only time I have seen decent bikes out and about in Cambridge is when the London to Cambridge is on or, more recently, when Le Tour kicked off here.
Laugh all you want, but footflaps is bang on the money there.
If you look further up I said it may be the case for his area, the rest of the UK may differ so people can ride £1k bikes to work.
the rest of the UK may differ so people can ride £1k bikes to work.
Cambridge is a bit of a special case as far as cycling in the UK goes.
I ride an expensive bike to work, despite living in the 3rd poorest region in northern Europe.
I ride a nice road bike into work in central London, would I do so if I was locking it up outside? No bloody chance!
I suspect it's still going, because 40% rate payers do well out of it while it's of no help to those who are genuinely badly off. (Other than helping the availability of second hand bikes.)
A tax free bike on one-year interest-free finance is "no help whatsoever" for people who are badly off.
A tax free bike on one-year interest-free finance is "doing well out of it" for 40% tax payers.
A tax free bike on one-year interest-free finance is "no help whatsoever" for people who are badly off.A tax free bike on one-year interest-free finance is "doing well out of it" for 40% tax payers.
People who are badly off aren't eligible for the scheme. If your take home is below national minimum wage after the salary sacrifice you can't take advantage of the scheme.
That's terrible, does that apply to Childcare Vouchers etc as well or is it just C2W?
Why is stopping people going under minimum wage terrible?
If you will go below the minimum wage do you really need a 1k bike?
Martyn Lewis rules
1. Do I need it?
2. Will I use it?
3. Can I afford it?
No to any of the above don't bother.
Why is stopping people going under minimum wage terrible
It's that persons choice?
But people earning minimum wage, those who can least afford to buy any bike to cycle to work on, are excluded from the scheme because the salary sacrifice would take their wage below "minimum wage".
Take away the moral implications of minimum wage, it's utter shit and is degrading and immoral, the C2W scheme benefits those with higher incomes than those with lower. Someone who pays income tax at 40% is in a much better place financially to purchase a suitable bike to use for work. Some one on minimum wage is not. However much or little you spend.
If you will go below the minimum wage do you really need a 1k bike?
Cheaper bikes are available.
That is kind of how tax incentives work, if you don't pay a lot of tax - you are not going to be able save alot through tax incentives. However, the tax benefit of the cycle scheme is that providing a bicycle to an employee is not a taxable benefit. So an enlightened employer can provide bikes to employees to compute to work and they will not be taxed on them even if they are on the minimum wage. The difficulty is with the salary sacrifice which is wrapped into the whole package by the [u]commercial[/u] scheme providers so the company has no cost to providing the benefit. This makes it more attractive to employers but does not work for employees close to the minimum wage.
I agree Mefty.
Not to get too OT, but the "enlightened employer" paying minimum wage really couldn't care less about it's employees. If it did you would argue that it needs to pay more than minimum wage. If they are unable to then their business model is fundamentally flawed and they really shouldn't be in business.
As you were......
why is stopping people going under minimum wage terrible?
If they have earned their money like everybody else they should have the same access to tax free bikes.
Presumably there is legislation in place to ensure that people on minimum wage are guaranteed minimum wage as their take home, which is great. It's a pity it conflicts with C2W.
If they have earned their money like everybody else they should have the same access to tax free bikes.
As I said above, they do - it is the commercial schemes that cause the conflict not the legislation.
I'd ride my £1k bike as it will also be my one and only off road bike.
