change in policy affecting all workers in same position

collective representation

contacting the union doesn’t automatically mean being antagonistic BTW, you should not read it as such
I’ve experience of collective representation without the need for union involvement (not that I have a union to make the representation anyway). Union involvement does come across as antagonistic to me, but like I said it’s quite possibly because I don’t work in a unionised industry so can’t relate, though given my industry is the same as OP’s wife, involvement of a union in the matter may similarly come across as antagonistic, if that’s not the way these things are normally dealt with?

I used to a couple of jobs ago (talking 5+ years back). It’s expected now that you’ll have it anyway.

If having a connection all day was critical to me getting my job done I’d be looking at business-class internet and getting the company to pay the extra.

doug – depends entirely on the established relationship between union reps and management

pointless discussion though tbh

doug – depends entirely on the established relationship between union reps and management

pointless discussion though tbh
Given the industry I’d reckon the relationship is nil, but yes, probably a pointless discussion!

Years ago at a firm I worked for the FD said that we shouldn’t be paying for home internet connections (even where we needed it) as HMRC could see it as BIK

It’s not wrong to have benefits in kind; you just have to pay tax on them. The employer would provide a P11D for benefits in kind and the FD of the firm you worked for should be well aware of that.

Did your wife previously expense the service items that were registered in her/your name? Not read the thread thoroughly so forgive me if I have missed this.

If not this might have more to do with HMRC than her employer. I’ve had the same issue with my company whereby I can no longer expense any service I use at home in support of work if that service is not in my employers name. In order to make it expensable, my employer would have to put their name on the bill for my landline/internet connection.

Shit! Its all going off! Scargill stylee

What’s it say they’ll provide in her contract? Is it a contractual change?

I see your problem then. When I work for clients in London, it costs me a bloody fortune in carrier pigeons!!

RFC 1149.

Previous gig, all phone calls and internet covered. Current gig, nothing and (provided own PC – which was sat there doing nothing in any case). The firm saves a shedload by you not working in an office too btw, it’s not entirely one-sided.

Log her time on the internet for work, pro rata that time against your bill, pop it into her expenses. Just because you have it doesn’t mean you should give it away for free.

Years ago at a firm I worked for the FD said that we shouldn’t be paying for home internet connections (even where we needed it) as HMRC could see it as BIK.

This – I work for a very large multinational and we’ve gone to this model. Essentially its too difficult to define the benefit of paying for the line, so its just assumed now you supply it. Phone calls on mobile or over VPN don’t cost me anything. We used to have to provide a seperate busines line, with its own ADSL which was just nuts.

Not being funny but if the job conditions are reasonable otherwise I’d hardly see it as something to strike about.

binners – Member
I can understand you being a bit miffed. If I didn’t need broadband for working from home, then I wouldn’t bother with it. I can’t see me, the missus, or the kids having any use for it at all. I’m sure you’re the same. So why should you have to pay for it? Its really, really expensive too nowadays.

Seems pretty unfair to me. I’d kick off then leave. haha 😆

yet if you were self employed working from home you’d be entitled to offset energy bills and other costs directly related to your work against tax?

Urban myth. We were advised a few years ago by our Accountancy Co. that anything more than £1 per week would be seen ‘badly’ by HMRC.

It’s not wrong to have benefits in kind; you just have to pay tax on them. The employer would provide a P11D for benefits in kind and the FD of the firm you worked for should be well aware of that.

Of course he was, and didn’t want us to waste company time with it. So I just gave a bit extra at the annual review to all affected. Far better, and pensionable 🙂

Even HMRCs own examples talk about more than £1 per week as a small amount and not needing further enquiries.

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/bimmanual/bim47825.htm

Edit: nice and easy guideline:

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/bimmanual/bim75010.htm

I think the recommended wfh allowance is a couple of hundred a year.

Our accountant told us to take it.

There’s a fixed amount from HMRC for working at home to cover utilities etc.

£3/week IIRC – so £1.20 if on higher rate

Saying that, I’m on the same gig now so just tether my phone

It’s not wrong to have benefits in kind; you just have to pay tax on them. The employer would provide a P11D for benefits in kind and the FD of the firm you worked for should be well aware of that.

right – id rather pay tax on a fifty quid BIK than have to pay fifty quid myself!

There’s a fixed amount from HMRC for working at home to cover utilities etc.

ninfans link to the HMRC’s own website seems to contradict that and this

Urban myth. We were advised a few years ago by our Accountancy Co. that anything more than £1 per week would be seen ‘badly’ by HMRC.

There’s a fixed amount from HMRC for working at home to cover utilities etc.

ninfans link to the HMRC’s own website seems to contradict that and this
Urban myth. We were advised a few years ago by our Accountancy Co. that anything more than £1 per week would be seen ‘badly’ by HMRC.

Now £4 according to this, it was £3 last time I claimed it

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/eimanual/eim32815.htm

Now £4 according to this, it was £3 last time I claimed it

Yes, but that is an optional simple way to claim. You can still claim for the actual costs and there is no limit on that as long as you can justify it.

Never mind the Internet, I work from home (I supply the broadband) and I’m missing out big time over my office colleagues in London.

What about the biscuits!?!

They’re free to all in our office… It’s like a biscuit nirvana. Yet I don’t get a biscuit subsidy for working at home. I need to get my voice heard and get representation from the top to fight for my right for biscuits. I’m going to tweet Mr Farage

I work fully remote, and the company pay for laptop, monitor, desk, chair, and co-working space if I want to work somewhere else for a change.

They don’t pay for broadband or biscuits.

We will fight for your right to Hob Nobs comrade!!! To the barricades!!!!!

If I’m freelancing, can I claim for more speakers?

You can claim the VAT back on them as a business expense. I’m unsure of where you stand on the subsequent structural damage to the building.

HMRC guidance states that bookshelf speakers are ok but not floorstanders or sub-woofers. Check current case law for speaker stands.

No chair so that you can throw shapes more effectively gofasterstripes?

Wonder how many people taking the piss are self employed and claim the VAT back on things like broadband, even though they have broadband in the house anyway.

I’m unsure of where you stand on the subsequent structural damage to the building.

Have you seen my sub? It makes those seem rather, umm, small. It’s 170*45*45 tranmission line…

Some plaster appears to have fallen off the wall. Luckily [for the other residents] I tend to only use it in the middle of the day, when they’re all out [off off work with a migraine].

Wonder how many people taking the piss are self employed and claim the VAT back on things like broadband, even though they have broadband in the house anyway.

One of my mates got the VAT back on his new kitchen, as a business expense. I thought that was pushing the boundaries, but his attitude was ‘**** it! I put everything through. If they pull me up for it, then I’ll pay it’. They didn’t.

Wonder how many people taking the piss are self employed and claim the VAT back on things like broadband, even though they have broadband in the house anyway.

*waves*

Although I had my business before broadband existed (I needed an ISDN line back then for clients to access data) – chicken meet egg.

do you claim VAT back for a proportion of your leccy too? 🙂

Wonder how many people taking the piss are self employed and claim the VAT back on things like broadband, even though they have broadband in the house anyway.

I claim 50% of the broadband cost as a business expense, why wouldn’t I? It is a genuine business expense.

I claim 50% of the broadband cost as a business expense, why wouldn’t I? It is a genuine business expense.

I haven’t got a problem with that.

But by the same token, the OP has a legitimate gripe no?

I wonder how many people taking the piss are fully employed and don’t assume that the tax man is making efficient use of all the allowances/expenses they are entitled to….
There are forms for this exact reason:
HMRC P87
This is the step before HMRC Tax Self-Assesment.

Assumption is the mother of all ^&%$ups.

Scar

Our company withdrew work internet access ages ago. In my old place I had 3 BT boxes, one each for me and the wife and one for home broadband.

The technology allows us just to use the home connection quickly and securly so seems churlish to try and claim it back!?

The “Working from home” unless defined in the job specification and a requirement for the role, is seen as a shared benefit with zero overhead for most businesses.

There are some companies that provide a WFH allowance, which is HMRC linked. Most however do not, as the administration cost of doing this would be higher than the amounts involved, so reduce the shared benefit to near zero.
(my company included)

This is where the P87 comes in.
You can claim to the letter of the HMRC allowances, rather than be restricted to what your company deems “benefitial” or “worthwhile” to it’s employees.

Scar

But by the same token, the OP has a legitimate gripe no?

Absolutely, I think the company are taking the piss.

[edit] Although it appears that the P87 form linked to above would help the OP’s wife claim back the money she would otherwise be losing so maybe they’re not taking the pee as much as i thought.

But by the same token, the OP has a legitimate gripe no?

I think they’ve got a very legitimate gripe, which is why I posted the link to stuff about custom and practice terms and conditions of employment. Foisting this on someone as a means to cut expenses could certainly amount to a big deal, depending how many others were affected,

This is where the P87 comes in.
You can claim to the letter of the HMRC allowances, rather than be restricted to what your company deems “benefitial” or “worthwhile” to it’s employees.

This, and for most folk it’ll be pennies unless they do loads of business miles and their company pays under the allowances.