.png)
.png)
JOHN MESSORE examines the implications of an unlikely decision by the Upper Tribunal
KEY POINTS
- Relevant motoring expenditure.
- Regulation 22A is in point.
- Link between the car allowance payment and use of the vehicle.
- Appeal expected.
- Reorganise employee mileage expenses.
Motor expenses were the subject of a recent case in the Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber). The decision went against the taxpayer and the reasoning behind the judge’s ruling has alarmed the taxpayer company and its advisers. For readers not familiar with the case of CRC v Cheshire Employer and Skills Development (formerly Total People) the main facts follow.
The company employed about 160 employees who drove their own cars and who...
Alternatively, you can register free of charge to read a limited amount of subscriber content per month.
Once you have registered, you will receive an email directing you back to read this item in full.
