Accommodation - taxed?

[BAJR Host]

Prospect's Dave Allen has replied with this

"I dealt with one individual who was a Prospect member and we provided legal advice and guidance."

"Our view was that as the accommodation was provided for working away from home, and not at the normal place of work, then it was the company and not the individual who should pay the tax."


That said, the Tax office.. as we now have worked out... have defined what work away from home is... and this was a place of permenant work (centred on the companies base)

If the person who got the advice would like to get in touch... please do... as I would love to know what advice you got, and if it can help.



"I don't have an archaeological imagination.."
Borekickers

[BAJR Host]

Have asked GAT how they are dealing with the changes, though have yet to hear anything back from them. They must have come up with a way they intend to deal with it in the future, - would this be an additional payment to staff that are having to pay for accomodation (this will need careful, consideration, so that all staff end up on the same 'basic wage')

How this is done would be useful.



"I don't have an archaeological imagination.."
Borekickers

[titmonkey]

It would also be good to hear how other units intend to deal with this situation too if it's going to become something everyone's going to have to cope with. I have to say that the whole thing is making me want to stick to local work for as long as I can but I reckon I'll be out of work by Christmas.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

[BAJR Host]

On checking Digger 3 (April 1999) Just before it all goes online.. so I had never seen it before

quote:.....Just occasionally the answer to that question will be “of course we supply accommodation”...at this point be very very careful. To be fair often the accommodation supplied is way above par...for example, English Heritage supply beautiful accommodation, but for a cost (it was free, but thanks to the government any free accommodation supplied to workers is now taxed.- Free accommodation is seen as a perk, ergo taxable, so EH are now forced to pass on the cost to the diggers - beware, this may soon happen to other units too).

Oh, and to make it more interesting... The IFA even read that issue. complaing about comments on the JIS, but not quite catching that bit about taxed accomodation



So it seems that the Digger knew about this as did English Heritage 9 (count them NINE YEARS) years ago.

But still some companies seem to be unaware... ( I feel stupid myself ) - but if you are a company.. and offer it - you better check now.. because going back over your accounts may be pretty painful.



"Gie's a Job.."
Prof. 'Dolly' Parton

[Tim]

EH knew this in 1993 because our accomadation and per diem expenses were taxed at source (PAYE) when working on the Fire Damage Project at Windsor Castle.


"Freedom of ideas is one thing, freedom of the purse is quite another". Edward Harris

[mercenary]

I can't help but thinking this is a perfect example of how cavalier our industry is about employment law, but demonstrates even better how little the outside world cares. Sobering to be perfectly honest.

[kevin wooldridge]

I was one of the people who got caught out in 2008 and had to retrospectively pay tax for accommodation provided by a one-off employer.....

Well here's a thing.....3 years on and this morning a letter pops through the front door from HMRC enclosing a cheque for a rebate for the 2008 tax year. They have off their own backs reassessed my tax for that year and decided that I did not after all have to pay the tax they'd charged me for accommodation (or at least their reassessment contains no mention of any tax being charged in lieu of accommodation provided by an employer). So I am entitled to a rebate....

Well I don't want to probe too deeply here incase it is Peter robbing Paul to payback Peter.....but can I ask in a very small voice: Does this mean that HMRC have resolved the archaeological accommodation issue in favour of archaeologists?