T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
1829.1 | Ass-u-me-ing that used prices work the same. | NEWOA::SAXBY | Vote for Perot : He's got $3B! | Wed Jul 15 1992 10:19 | 9 |
|
Looks good for those contractors who like to drive big, old cars,
though.
Perhaps an XJ-S is a suitable replacement for the Calibra, after all!
Pity DEC's lease scheme doesn't include used cars.
Mark
|
1829.2 | | VANGA::KERRELL | Dave Kerrell @REO 830-2279 | Wed Jul 15 1992 10:33 | 6 |
| re.0:
Looks about right to me. The whole point is to make the car no more valuable
than having the cash in your pay packet.
/Dave.
|
1829.3 | | NEWOA::DALLISON | Disturbing my little peace | Wed Jul 15 1992 10:40 | 1 |
| Some of us *have* to take the car and ain't allowed the cash.
|
1829.4 | Bad news | KERNEL::SHELLEYR | Knocking on Heaven's daw-waw | Wed Jul 15 1992 11:31 | 8 |
| I've just done some sums on the figures in .0
My lease car is 1600cc and cost �13,000.
I will be worse off by �25 a month, assuming that the same loading
(1� times) for low business mileage (<2500 miles).
Roy
|
1829.5 | | SUBURB::THOMASH | The Devon Dumpling | Wed Jul 15 1992 11:54 | 5 |
|
I suggest you all check your P11D's VERY carefully next year.
Heather
|
1829.6 | The 1994 P11D is the one that will change if required | JANUS::BARKER | Jeremy Barker - CBN - Reading, UK | Wed Jul 15 1992 12:13 | 6 |
| Re: .5
As the P11D is for the benefits during the previous tax year, the
new rules (if they are changed) have no bearing on it.
jb
|
1829.7 | Needs to be Mileage related | SEDDFS::KORMAN | tgif!! | Wed Jul 15 1992 12:26 | 19 |
|
IMO,
What they really should do is take those values, then multiply by a business
mileage factor,
Taxable Benefit = Scale Value * Private Mileage/Total Mileage
Then, those for whom the car is a total perk would be taxed on the full value,
those of us who do a substantial amount of business mileage (65%-70% in my case)
would not pay as much. The "fixed profit" scheme that they use for tax
allowances when you use your own car on you company's business works something
like that I believe
(Personally I'd quite like an Ex-Army Landy, but that isn't suitable for
business use!)
Dave
|
1829.8 | | SUBURB::THOMASH | The Devon Dumpling | Wed Jul 15 1992 13:02 | 23 |
|
>Then, those for whom the car is a total perk would be taxed on the full value,
>those of us who do a substantial amount of business mileage (65%-70% in my case)
>would not pay as much. The "fixed profit" scheme that they use for tax
>allowances when you use your own car on you company's business works something
>like that I believe
I think the idea of taxing people less, the more business miles they
do is fine.
Given your scenario, someone could get taxed more for doing 10,000
private miles, than someone doing 30,000 private miles if they
did more business miles.
The car is also more of a perk for those who do many business miles,
one because of the current tax situation, and two because the
depreciation hit is taken evenly.
Heather
PS, The P11D is used to check your last years tax, and estimate your
next years tax code.
|
1829.9 | They wouldn't dare... | DOOZER::JENKINS | Suitably refreshed | Wed Jul 15 1992 15:48 | 7 |
|
If the SMMT lobby in the house lets this become law I will be very
surpised.
It will kill the car manufacturing industry.
When is it due to take effect? 1993/94 tax year?
|
1829.10 | The days of 0% discount ????? | SHIPS::BROWN_C | | Wed Jul 15 1992 18:01 | 13 |
| If this is passed in its current form, I would expect to see a lot of
cars for sale with little or no discount, hosts of options, and priced
at �10,999, �13,999, or �16,999. These would probably be very very
difficult to get hold of for the private buyer, and yet somehow much
easier for leasing companies etc.
For Joe Public, there'll be lots of special editions with 35% discounts
available to make him feel good as he drives out of the showroom.
Now who wants to take over the lease on that Skoda in the car park?
- Chris -
|
1829.11 | AND THERE'S MORE! | SEDOAS::MILLER_N | | Wed Jul 15 1992 19:37 | 16 |
| Re: .9
Yes likely to be implemented for 93/94 tax year.
There is also mention of a suppliment tax for cash paid as an
alternative to a car. ie DEC's 3,400 could be taxed at your rating
plus 10%! There's no winning!!
Once it was handy to work in a capacity that required a car, as you did
get some private use of it and paid tax towards it. Now it's a
liability...I need a car to do my job and have a choice of massive tax
bill or footing the bill for my own car and STILL paying some extra
tax!!
Nig. (Deeply Depressed of Leatherhead)
|
1829.12 | The answer is.... | LARVAE::SMART_A | Amnesia is loss of ...er..umm | Thu Jul 16 1992 09:31 | 18 |
| Of course there is an answer (with tongue firmly in cheek)....
No more company cars! Digital will have a fleet of basic pool cars
fitted with cell phones and an system that requires your card key to
enable the car. You complete your journey and return the car using
your card key to disable the vehicle. Your cost centre is then charged
for the mileage, phone calls, etc. You then go home in your own car
that you buy with your market supplement.
These cars will, of course, all be white Escorts with big blue letters
down the side as part of a cost cutting advertising scheme.
All of this will then avoid the employee having to worry about income
tax liability and the company from having to administer an ad hoc car
fleet and having to pay a tedious market supplement. What could be
easier?
BTW another pig just flew past my window...... ;-)
|
1829.13 | | SUBURB::THOMASH | The Devon Dumpling | Thu Jul 16 1992 11:43 | 10 |
|
> There is also mention of a suppliment tax for cash paid as an
> alternative to a car. ie DEC's 3,400 could be taxed at your rating
> plus 10%! There's no winning!!
Is this an announcement? its currently 3,000, so 3,400 at 10%
extra would be welcome.
Heather
|
1829.14 | 3400 referenced here - 132 columns | ODDONE::BOARDMAN_K | Counting competency - 1235..er..4 | Thu Jul 16 1992 12:54 | 168 |
| I N T E R O F F I C E M E M O R A N D U M
Date: 24-Jun-1992 09:16am BST
From: GINA ELBOTH
ELBOTHG AT A1_CHEFS at SUBURB at REO
Dept: PERSONNEL
Tel No: 7830-6448
TO: See Below
Subject: FY93 Car Supplements and Cash Equivalents
This note is to inform you that both Car Supplements and Cash
Equivalents will remain the same for FY93. Attached are the
calculations for the proposed FY93 Car Supplements showing the
baskets of cars being used.
We have taken out the two Ford models from our minimum standard
company car: the Sierra is due to be replaced by a new model
this year and current lease costs reflect the low residual value
of the current model; the Escort 1.6 Ghia is no longer a
representative model - the uptake of Escorts in the company is
minimal. The most representative car both in terms of the
competitive position and in popularity in the fleet is the
Vauxhall Cavalier 1.6L and we have decided to use this as the
base car.
You will also notice that the lease costs for some higher priced
cars have decreased since this time last year - this is largely
due to the reduction in car purchase tax.
We have up-dated the Preferred Car List to include the most
popular cars ordered during thee past 12 months. The list will
also include all factory fitted options. In doing this we hope
to make it easier for people to order their cars.
There have been no increases to Insurance costs unless the
insurance groups have altered.
We will be sending a note to this effect to all employees who
have a lease car and/or are eligible for a cash supplement on 1st
July. A copy will be forwarded to you before then.
Regards
Gina
FY93 CAR SUPPLEMENTS
ALL BASED ON 36 MONTHS/36,000 MILES
BELOW LEVEL 8 : MINIMUM CAR COST
Model Lease Cost Insurance Driver Cost
CAVALIER 1.6L 3,200.00
AVERAGE COST 3,200.00 200.00 3,400.00
MINIMUM DEDUCTOR/CASH EQUIVALENT SET AT �3,400
FY93 CAR SUPPLEMENTS
ALL BASED ON 36 MONTHS/36,000 MILES
LEVEL 8/9
Model Lease Cost Insurance Driver Cost VAT Total Cash
AUDI 80 E 3,736.32 350.00 686.32 120.11 806.43
SIERRA 2.0 GLSI 3,886.00 250.00 736.00 128.80 864.80
CITROEN BX19 1.9 TZS 3,456.00 250.00 306.00 53.55 359.55
CAVALIER 2.0 SRI 3,931.00 350.00 881.00 154.18 1,035.18
ROVER 216 GSI 3,692.16 250.00 542.16 94.88 637.04
AVERAGE COST 3,740.30 290.00 630.30 110.30 740.60
REQUIRED SUPPLEMENT 740.60 4,140.60
EXISTING SUPPLEMENT 1,300.00 4,300.00
INCREASE/(DECREASE) (559.40) (159.40)
FY93 SUPPLEMENT 1,300.00 4,300.00
FY93 CAR SUPPLEMENTS
ALL BASED ON 36 MONTHS/36,000 MILES
Levels 10/11
Model Lease Cost Insurance Driver Cost VAT Total Cash
GRANADA 2.0I GHIA 5,289.00 350.00 2,239.00 391.83 2,630.83
SAPPHIRE 2.0I GHIA 4,244.40 350.00 1,194.40 209.02 1,403.42
CARLTON 2.0 GLI 4,716.00 350.00 1,666.00 291.55 1,957.55
BMW 318i 4,372.00 350.00 1,322.00 231.35 1,553.35
CAVALIER 2.0 CDI 4,146.00 250.00 996.00 174.30 1,170.30
AVERAGE COST 4,553.48 330.00 1,483.48 259.61 1,743.09
REQUIRED SUPPLEMENT 1,743.09 5,143.09
EXISTING SUPPLEMENT 2,200.00 5,200.00
INCREASE/(DECREASE) (456.91) (56.91)
FY93 SUPPLEMENT 2,200.00 5,200.00
FY93 CAR SUPPLEMENTS
ALL BASED ON 36 MONTHS/36,000 MILES
Levels 12+
Model Lease Cost Insurance Driver Cost VAT Total Cash
AUDI 100 2.0E 5,153.28 400.00 2,153.28 376.82 2,530.10
ROVER 820 SI 5,176.00 400.00 2,176.00 380.80 2,556.80
GRANADA 2.9i GHIA 5,563.20 350.00 2,513.20 439.81 2,953.01
SAAB CD XS 2.0I 5,287.00 400.00 2,287.00 400.23 2,687.23
BMW 320I SE 5,222.00 350.00 2,172.00 380.10 2,552.10
AVERAGE COST 5,280.30 380.00 2,260.30 395.55 2,655.85
REQUIRED SUPPLEMENT 2,655.85 6,055.85
EXISTING SUPPLEMENT 3,250.00 6,380.00
INCREASE/(DECREASE) (594.15) (324.15)
FY93 SUPPLEMENT 3,250.00 6,380.00
|
1829.16 | Short Changed | SEDOAS::BRISTOW_A | | Thu Jul 16 1992 14:12 | 7 |
| RE. 13
Heather,
If you are only getting � 3000.00 you better talk to payroll PDQ....
Andy
|
1829.17 | lith on the horizon....maybe ? | WELCLU::OVERELL | | Thu Jul 16 1992 14:21 | 18 |
|
I'll try that again...
All this talk of opting out of the car scheme is fine, but....
I am a cs engineer working out in the field, and the management team
at my office has taken the decisions not to allow engineers to opt out.
They are also imposing some restrictions on the type of cars that
engineers can order...so things dont look to good if this current
proposal goes to legislation.
....But their is hope.... As the company provides us with a basic car
(cavalier 1.6) and anything above this is paid for by the individual
then surely the tax assesment will be based on what the company
provides, and not on what the employee contributes....or is this just
wishful thinking ?
|
1829.18 | how to measure the value | LARVAE::IVES_J | Bad Karma in the UK | Thu Jul 16 1992 15:14 | 6 |
| this is interesting. car fleet should publish the value of the car on
VTX as well as the value of the extras.
Would the value of the car be based on the list price do you think ?
I wonder if the deisel metro is under 8K ? Doubt it.
|
1829.19 | Different messages | ROCKS::RDAVIES | An expert Amateur | Thu Jul 16 1992 15:15 | 166 |
| There's a problem here: I received an official message about the lease
changes, it was different to .14!
The version I received appended below:
Richard
--------------------------------------------------------------------
I N T E R O F F I C E M E M O R A N D U M
Date: 30-Jun-1992 18:21 BST
From: INTERNAL PR @REO
INTERNAL_PR AT A1 at SUBURB at REO
Dept: Internal Communication
Tel No: 0734 202147
TO: See Below
Subject: CAR SCHEME ANNOUNCEMENT
*THIS MESSAGE IS FROM ALASTAIR WRIGHT*
NEWS FOR PEOPLE IN THE CAR LEASE SCHEME
This is an up-date for all employees participating in
the car lease scheme
You have been sent this message because in one way or
another you are involved in the company's car lease
scheme.
Please see below for the information that's relevant to
you.
CAR SUPPLEMENTS/CASH EQUIVALENT
During the last year there have been manufacturers' increases and
residual values have continued to fall. There have also been
reductions in interest rates and car purchase tax. As a consequence
of all these factors, the cost of leasing a car now is either roughly
the same as or less than this time last year. There will, therefore,
be no increase in either the Car Supplements or Cash Equivalents for
FY93.
The minimum standard car for FY93 is the Vauxhall Cavalier 1.6L. The
Ford Sierra 1.8LX has been excluded since the imminent model change
has had an adverse impact on the lease cost. In addition, there has
been very little take up on the Ford Escort range during the last 12
months, and so we consider it inappropriate to include it as one of
our minimum standard company cars.
PREFERRED CAR LIST
As you know we introduced the Preferred Car List last year. It may
be worth re-stating the objectives of the list:
a) By fixing the price of cars on the list, you can obtain, at zero
cost, throughout the year, the majority of cars within the basket for
your level. This basket is based on competitive practice and the
supplements are based on the average costs of these models. (See
attachment.)
b) Ordering a car from the list cuts out the lengthy quotation
process and you can, therefore, order your car with the minimum of
delay.
With this in mind, the list is being updated to take account of
imminent model changes. It is also being expanded to include the most
popular models according to your orders over the past 12 months. The
updated list will include all factory fitted options, and their
prices, which you may add to the model of your choice. The cost of
the options will be added to the lease cost of your car.
Only factory fitted options may be included in your order. For those
cars without a radio-cassette player fitted as standard, please
follow the guidelines on VTX Car Fleet - Non-Standard Radio
Equipment.
Dealer fitted options, such as tow bars, may be ordered and fitted,
at your own cost, after you have taken delivery of your car.
However, you need to gain permission of the leasing company before
fitting these. Please be aware that when you return your car to the
leasing company, it must be returned to its original condition.
ORDERING A CAR
Please ensure that you order a car that is appropriate for your job
and that the anticipated annual mileage is accurate at the time of
placing the order. Should your circumstances change during the lease
period, please inform Car Fleet who will re-negotiate the lease
period with the leasing company. Please ensure that you look after
your car, keeping it clean inside and out and regularly maintained.
Please ensure the car is returned punctually at the end of the lease
period in a clean condition. Any damage to your car should be
rectified by a Digital preferred supplier before returning to the
leasing company.
UPGRADES FOR SUPPLEMENT HOLDERS
Should you choose to upgrade your car, please remember that the
maximum you may spend is 20% of your base salary in addition to your
supplement.
NON-SUPPLEMENT HOLDERS
The basic conditions remain the same. You should not choose a car
that costs more than 20% of your base salary.
FURTHER INFORMATION
Please contact your local HRO representative for further information.
DIGITAL CAR SCHEME - BASKET OF CARS PER LEVEL
EFFECTIVE 1ST JULY 1992
LEVEL BASKET OF CARS CAR CASH
SUPP EQUIVALENT
LESS THAN 8 VAUXHALL CAVALIER 1.6 L
SF,SH,SK 0 �3,400
8 & 9 AUDI 80 E )
SL,SM FORD SIERRA 2.0 GLSI )
CITROEN BX19 1.9 TZS ) �1,300 �4,300
VAUXHALL CAVALIER 2.0 SRI )
ROVER 216 GSI )
10 & 11 FORD GRANADA 2.0 I GHIA )
SN,SP FORD SIERRA 2.0 I GHIA )
VAUXHALL CARLTON 2.0 GLI ) �2,200 �5,200
BMW 318 I )
VAUXHALL CAVALIER 2.0 CDI )
12 AND ABOVE SAAB CD XS 2.0 I )
SR,SS ROVER 820 SI )
FORD GRANADA 2.9 I GHIA ) �3,250 �6,380
BMW 320 I SE )
AUDI 100 2.0 E )
Distribution:
Removed to save space, but suffice it to say it was 2003 lines long!
|
1829.20 | go figure! | SUBURB::THOMASH | The Devon Dumpling | Thu Jul 16 1992 15:57 | 25 |
|
> If you are only getting � 3000.00 you better talk to payroll PDQ....
Andy, I did,
I have a mail back saying that at 3,000 I am not undercompensated,
but "less overcompensated" than those who take the car.
If you look at the last mail, you will see:
level 8/9 existing supp car 1300.00 cash 4300.00
incr/(decrease) (599.40) (159.40)
FY 93 supplement 1300.00 4300.00
This means that personel think they are "over compensating" the people
with cars by 599.40, and those who take the cash by 159.40.
If you look at the difference in car vs cash supplement, it is 3,000
NOT 3,400
level 10/11 are the same in the bottom line, 3,000 difference, however
the amount of "over compensation" is approx. 100 less.
Heather
|
1829.21 | Damn, just when you all started counting the extra | TIMMII::RDAVIES | An expert Amateur | Thu Jul 16 1992 16:07 | 11 |
| .20 is born out by the line in the mail I reproduced in .19:
>> There will, therefore, be no increase in either the Car Supplements or
>> Cash Equivalents for FY93.
Seems like the re-interpretation into the mail in .14 managed to
suggest that it would be raised (Yes I read it that way too).
However, as .19 is *THIS MESSAGE IS FROM ALASTAIR WRIGHT* I guess it
get's the ultimate word.
Richard
|
1829.22 | | ODDONE::BOARDMAN_K | Counting competency - 1235..er..4 | Thu Jul 16 1992 16:18 | 8 |
| > Seems like the re-interpretation into the mail in .14 managed to
> suggest that it would be raised (Yes I read it that way too).
T'other way round. The mail in .14 was sent out before the mail in
.19. I, too, would now believe .19 is gospel.
Cheers...Keith
|
1829.23 | UPPER TAX LIMIT? | SEDOAS::MILLER_N | | Mon Aug 03 1992 13:09 | 10 |
| Away from the rat-hole.....
Does anyone know where the present 19,250 limit comes into play.
If a car has a list price of say 20,500 but the lease company gets a
discount on this of say 10%, is the car then valued by the tax man at
18,450?
Any info gratefully received.
Nig.
|
1829.24 | Expect the worst.. | COMICS::COOMBER | Bungalows in Walthamstow | Mon Aug 03 1992 13:19 | 14 |
| I don't know if this answer is right or wrong, but if you work on the
principle of expect the worst , it can only get better. My feeling
is that they would use the list price and not the price that was paid.
That whist is in the purchasers benefit leaves it open to all sorts of
fiddling, can't beleive that of the taxman. Not only that, if they stick
to the recomended retail price it's fair all round. If A has a better
deal at dealer a than B, A could have exactly the same car as B but
pay less tax because he got a better deal.
As I say that is not a knowing answer just a feeling. I can't see the
taxman letting money slip away that easy.
Garry
|
1829.25 | | KERNEL::SHELLEYR | Diet free Caffeine Coke | Mon Aug 03 1992 13:20 | 13 |
| This has been discussed previously in this notesfile.
The conclusion, if I remember correctly, was that it is the on the road
price that the lease company pay.
Fleet will tell you the cost but only when the car is delivered.
This makes it difficult to predict the exact amount to make sure it
falls below the tax bracket.
This will be even more difficult when the new price brackets come
into effect next year.
Roy
|
1829.26 | REal PRice, not List | VOGON::MORGAN | Clouds of Anger, Tears of Rain | Mon Aug 03 1992 13:42 | 11 |
|
It *is* the price that the lease company actually pay for the car.
However there was a recent ruling by H.M. Tax people that said
something like this price was only applicable if Joe Public could buy
the car at the same price i.e. get the same discount as PHH.
How enforcable this is I wonder .
Rich
|
1829.27 | NEW TAX BANDS | YUPPY::ELLAWAY | Martin Ellaway@hhl | Wed Aug 05 1992 16:40 | 38 |
| Autocar and Motor published the supposed new tax brackets today and who
the winners and losers would be:
12 bands under 4999
5000-6499
6500-7999
8000-9999
10,000-12,499
12,500-15,499
15,500-19,499
19,500-24,499
24,500-30,999
31,000-38,999
39,000-49,999
50,000-62,500
The've yet to decide what to do about the peeps with Co. cars over
62,500
Car List Price present tax new tax change
escort 1.4 8163 535 499 -7%
cav 1.8 GL 12,904 693 776 +12%
BMW 318i 15,570 1108 1550 +40%
Saab 9000 18.995 1108 1550 +40%
Audi 80 2.8 18,995 1776 1550 -13%
Merc 230 22,904 2300 1950 -15%
Jag XJ6 27,740 2300 2570 +12%
BMW 535i SP 32,240 3720 3108 -16%
911 carrera 48,311 3720 3950 +6%
Merc 400 52,650 3720 5000 +34%
All based on 10,000 business miles per year, calcultions for escort and
cav are based on 25% income tax, all the rest are based on 40%.
Regards Martin
|
1829.28 | Milage based? | TIMMII::TOMMII::RDAVIES | Amateur Expert | Fri Aug 07 1992 17:33 | 5 |
| Did the article say if these bands still attract the 50% 150% for +18k -2.5K
company milage?
Richard
|
1829.29 | | FUTURS::WATSON | Fee fi fo fum, | Mon Aug 10 1992 09:21 | 1 |
| re.28 Yes.
|
1829.30 | | IEDUX::jon | Whoooooooosh! It's cucumber man! | Mon Aug 10 1992 14:37 | 9 |
| Re .29
Was that "Yes, it did say," or "Yes, the bands still attract the 50%
and 150% based on company mileage?"
As my last P11D showed a grand total of 248 miles of business mileage,
I have more than a passing interest in clarifying this...
Jon
|
1829.31 | | FUTURS::WATSON | Fee fi fo fum, | Mon Aug 10 1992 15:54 | 4 |
| Yes, the proposal did state that there would be 50% and 150% allowances
based on company miles (at 2,500 and 18,000).
Rik
|
1829.32 | Just before I order my car ... | MAJORS::MARSHALL | | Mon Dec 07 1992 14:07 | 23 |
|
I'm a bit behind the times here ... ;^)
I may have missed something here, or misread something.
My taxable benefit for having a car at the moment is 2770 (*1.5 for
<2500 business miles).
If I get a car which falls in the band 15500-19499 (which will be the
case if I simply get the same car as I have now), what is the new
taxable benefit (assuming these changes do come in).
My maths tells me it is 3875 (*1.5), meaning being taxed on �5812.50
as a pose to �4155 (meaning approximately 40% more tax - about �34.53
more tax per month).
What an absolute bummer.
Is all this extra tax being used to top up the coffers after Lamont and
his cronies have spent it all ??????
Steve
|
1829.33 | | MILE::JENKINS | Suitably refreshed | Tue Dec 08 1992 12:46 | 7 |
|
I think your calculations are ok, but at the moment, the bands are
only for discussion purposes. They could easily change before becoming
law in the '94 tax year.
Richard.
|
1829.34 | Soon? | PEKING::GERRYT | | Tue Jan 19 1993 13:27 | 5 |
| Is he likely to announce these bandings in the next Budget on March
16th 1993?
My car's due for renewal this May on the scheme.
Tim
|
1829.35 | | MILE::JENKINS | Suitably refreshed | Tue Jan 19 1993 13:45 | 15 |
| It much depends on what you read....
An Autocar & Motor from November said "1994", "not next year".
December "What Crap?" says the new tax will be introduced in 1994.
January "What Crap?" says the new tax will be introduced in April 93.
I've seen no recent comment in the press, although earlier comment
suggested 94.
I think the Government would like to introduce it in April because
they need the revenue. However, I don't know if they will be able
get the bill through Parliament in time.
If I were you, I'd plan for the worst and expect the new tax rates.
Richard.
|
1829.36 | Will it work like this? | JOCKEY::BUCKG | don't let THEM grind you down | Mon Feb 22 1993 23:17 | 16 |
| re .27
if the standard car is a "taxable benefit" then all non supplement
drivers on the scheme should be in the same tax bracket under the new
tax laws. It should not matter if the individual chooses to spend
more on a better car as it is not a benefit.
ie all non supplement qualified car users should be in 10000-12500
bracket based upon the cost of a 1.6 cavalier.
If this is correct then car supplement holders will have a bit of a
rough time of it. They may be better off without the supplement.
I bet the taxman will have a different opinion than above.
Gareth.
|
1829.37 | | VANGA::KERRELL | ('O^O') | Tue Feb 23 1993 09:33 | 3 |
| Is it true that company supplied car phones are now taxed as a benefit as well?
Dave.
|
1829.38 | | SBPUS4::Mark | at the trailing edge..... | Tue Feb 23 1993 10:46 | 7 |
| Yes. And it gets seriously iffy around the "private" use of the phone.
One of the Taxman's reasons is that even if you make no private outgoing
calls (I do make some, actually) then you receive private calls on the phone,
so it is still a benefit.
I wish I had a daughter, then I could forbid her to marry a taxman.
|
1829.39 | Taxmen, like the police, have a job to do. | BAHTAT::DODD | | Tue Feb 23 1993 11:17 | 5 |
| If you make no private calls then a phone is not counted as a benefit.
If the employee repays the cost of all private calls (inc VAT) and
private usage is low then the phone is not classed as a benefit.
Andrew
|
1829.40 | | VANGA::KERRELL | ('O^O') | Tue Feb 23 1993 12:02 | 3 |
| Any idea how this tax is calculated?
Dave.
|
1829.41 | | SBPUS4::Mark | at the trailing edge..... | Tue Feb 23 1993 16:08 | 3 |
| Until a couple of months ago, you also had to pay an appropriate proportion
for the standing charges. This was changed to a flat charge and was then done
away with recently.
|
1829.42 | | BAHTAT::DODD | | Wed Feb 24 1993 08:02 | 7 |
| The benefit is 200 pounds.
re .41 This was only Digital's interpretation of the rules. A view I
could never find anyone outside Digital to substantiate. Including my
tax office.
Andrew
|
1829.43 | | VANGA::KERRELL | ('O^O') | Wed Feb 24 1993 08:52 | 6 |
| Let me get this straight, I have too lose �200 of tax free income, so that DEC
and it's customer and suppliers can reach me in my car?
Something smells a bit iffy round 'ere.
Dave.
|
1829.44 | You could be a customer. | BAHTAT::DODD | | Wed Feb 24 1993 09:48 | 13 |
| Dave,
You could try reading the advice which has been written or talking to
your tax office or expenses. I will offer my understanding once more:-
If you make no private calls the phone is not treated as a benefit.
Receiving calls is ignored.
If you repay the cost of private calls and usage is low then the phone
is not treated as a benefit.
Was that too hard?
Andrew
|
1829.45 | I like driving in my car | VANGA::KERRELL | but that's not my real job | Wed Feb 24 1993 11:27 | 6 |
| Andrew,
thank you so much for taking the time to answer. How about when I'm
delayed on business and ring home? Is that business or personal? How the hell
do they work that one out? Don't asnwer that, I'll go ask the taxperson.
Dave.
|
1829.46 | | BAHTAT::DODD | | Wed Feb 24 1993 12:20 | 13 |
| The taxman really doesn't care what is a personal call and what isn't.
It is up to your employer to state what he will accept. Our guidelines
state that you can phone home from a hotel - but do it cheaply - I take
this to mean ring from the car as hotel rates are a rip off. We also
have guidelines as to what calls you can make from the office - the
same rules apply to a car phone as it is just as much Digital's
property and service.
This is really not as onerous as it may at first seem.
Happy to be of service.
Andrew
|
1829.47 | | VANGA::KERRELL | but that's not my real job | Wed Feb 24 1993 12:25 | 6 |
| > This is really not as onerous as it may at first seem.
That's the info I was looking for!
Thanks,
Dave.
|
1829.48 | don't blink or you will miss it!!!! | WELCLU::CADD | L.U.F.C. League Champions 1991/92 | Tue Mar 02 1993 21:24 | 24 |
|
I have been looking at the scales put in here and have a few points
to make.
I received my form P11D with the capital cost of my car on
it. I have a Mazda 323f GTi which, when purchased 2 years ago the list
price was approx 14150 pounds.
The capital cost on my form P11D is 12393 pounds, I seem to recall that
the lease companies ask for around 12% discount from the list price so
this works out about right.
So I assume from my form P11D that the value of my car is 12%lower
than the list price, and this lower price is the value that will be used
for tax purposes(as it is on my P11D). This could be beneficial to those
people whose car price goes over one scale limit at list price, but is
below that scale limit when purchased with the lease company discount.
Any comments
Paul Cadd...
p.s. don't all log in at once to check your P11D !!!!!!
|
1829.49 | | ESBS01::RUTTER | Rut The Nut | Wed Mar 03 1993 09:06 | 26 |
| � So I assume from my form P11D that the value of my car is 12%lower
� than the list price, and this lower price is the value that will be used
� for tax purposes(as it is on my P11D).
I thought that the tax man *always* used the list price to determine the
value of a car for taxation purposes. If the lease company are stating
that the value is different (agreed, it may reflect what they claim to
pay for the vehicle), then can they fill out a form for me ?
Consider the case(s) where a vehicle can be purchased in Europe for a
lesser amount than the car is available in the UK. I think that the
tax man (or woman ?) would use the UK list price to determine value.
Problems arise where an imported car is not available in the UK and the
tax person doesn't like to use the figure you paid for it (eg 959 ?).
Also, what about the times when one could purchase a Ferrari for less
than it could be sold for ??? Get taxed on its value, or on its cost
price to you - there is/was a noticeable difference.
Anyway, if your paperwork lists the car value at the lower amount, I
would hope you would only get taxed on that basis.
J.R.
|
1829.50 | Tax is on INVOICE bottom line | PFENIG::DRAPER | | Wed Mar 03 1993 10:23 | 33 |
| re: -.1
No, John - under current regulations the P11D, and hence what the
taxman will charge you, depends on the bottom line of the invoice to
PHH, not the list price of vehicle + extras.
There are two points worth noting about this:
Firstly, if you have a car, which by virtue of PHH discount crosses a
tax boundary, you should obtain a copy of the dealer invoice to PHH.
Dealers I have talked to about this have always been willing to supply
this (not sure about PHH directly - never spoken to them about it).
Then, if your P11D gets screwed up, you have some ammunition to argue
with. If you're not sure who supplied your car, check the paperwork
that came with it.
Second point is that these same dealers will usually talk quite happily
about the discount level that PHH get (it seems to vary from
manufacturer to manfacturer rather than dealer to dealer), so you can
work out in advance whether or not you will cross the 19250 (or
whatever) tax boundary.
Of course tax changes will send all the above down the tubes -
especially if calculated against list prices as it is rumoured that
they will be. However, nobody can yet say what year (if any) these
proposed changed will be introduced.
Can't comment on foreign purchases - no experience, but I wouldn't be
surprised if some obscure EEC regulation didn't have a bearing on it
somewhere (if they can call a carrot a fruit, they can do anything)!!
Steve
|
1829.51 | | ESBS01::RUTTER | Rut The Nut | Wed Mar 03 1993 10:30 | 5 |
| Thanks for the reply, although it doesn't affect me at present.
Must say, I did think tax was based on list price.
J.R.
|
1829.52 | what about 2nd hand? | PLAYER::SPENCER | working......not! | Fri Mar 05 1993 11:43 | 7 |
| Has anything been said about second hand cars? I've got a car through
my company and paid about 1/2 the original list price (three years
old). Does this mean I get taxed on the original list price or the
purchase price to me. Hopefully the answer will be the latter,
otherwise I'll be changing to something cheaper.
Nigel
|
1829.53 | Well...anybody know??? | KERNEL::BAYLISD | Filth Daemon from Hell | Tue Oct 19 1993 11:47 | 6 |
| re -.1
Anybody know the answer to this question???
Dave.
|
1829.54 | | BAHTAT::DODD | | Wed Oct 20 1993 13:35 | 7 |
| It is my belief that the tax is based on the list price of the car when
new. My wife's company bought a demo Saab for her and that was the
information given at that time.
Why don't you ring the tax man and ask? Then tell us.
Andrew
|
1829.55 | | COMICS::SHELLEY | | Sat Jan 22 1994 10:18 | 19 |
| I can clarify what 'price' the IR will be working out the tax on.
On page 1 of an IR booklet called "Income tax and company cars from
6 April 1994: a guide for employees" (Phone the tax office and they'll
send you one free).
CAR BENEFIT The amount on which you pay tax each year is 35%
of the 'price' of the car less any reductions for
business mileage...
PRICE The price of a car will usually be its list price
plus accessories and delivery charge, VAT, and car
tax where appropriate. The price will be subject
to an upper limit of �80,000. There are special
rules for 'classic cars' and cars without a list
price.
Royston
|
1829.56 | I think I'm going to be double taxed ! | NEWOA::CROME_A | | Thu Jan 27 1994 11:02 | 16 |
| With the new "car tax" rules about to be implemented for the new tax year
it has dawned on me that I'm going to be "incorrectly taxed".
Here's why:
Standard benefit = Cavalier 1.6ls = �2950
My car = Astra GSi = �2950 (Dec's Contribution) + �947 my contribution
= �3897/year
The tax office will tax me on the list price of the GSi when new, surely
they should tax me on the list price of the Cavalier as this is the true benefit.
Any thoughts or suggestions ??
Andy
|
1829.57 | | WOTVAX::PC0905::MEAKINS | Clive Meakins @OLO | Thu Jan 27 1994 11:17 | 6 |
| > The tax office will tax me on the list price of the GSi when new, surely
> they should tax me on the list price of the Cavalier as this is the true
> benefit.
But you get tax relief on the additional contribution you make to your car, if
you paid with taxed income, then the Cavalier price should be used.
|
1829.58 | | SUBURB::THOMASH | The Devon Dumpling | Mon Jan 31 1994 10:50 | 19 |
| > Standard benefit = Cavalier 1.6ls = �2950
>
> My car = Astra GSi = �2950 (Dec's Contribution) + �947 my contribution
> = �3897/year
> The tax office will tax me on the list price of the GSi when new, surely
> they should tax me on the list price of the Cavalier as this is the
> true benefit.
> Any thoughts or suggestions ??
Andy, the revenue doesn't care what DEC's contribution is, that's a
red herring. It wouldn't matter to them if DECs contribution were 0
or 10,000, or whether the prefered car was a mini or a mercedes.
Bottom line, you have an Astra GSI which you fund out of pre-tax
earnings, therefore they will tax you on an Astra GSI.
Heather - waiting for a tax refund of �1500 for using her car for
company travel.
|
1829.59 | Still having trouble with this.... | SLPSTK::ILES | Mike Iles - Business Partner Development Assistance | Mon Jan 31 1994 13:13 | 12 |
| I still don't understand this....
For the new tax year I'm taxed on the benefit of a car of a certain value,
but I'm paying towards that car, by an amount of real money which I could
have and be taxed on if I didn't have that car. OK, so thats my choice
but the total benefit to me of having that car should be less than the benefit
as evaluated as a percentage of the list price of that car.
Why? The benefit that I am receiving in kind is that of a 1.6 Cavalier and I am
purchasing the extra benefit of a higher standard car with my own money.
-Mike-
|
1829.60 | but it's not yours -yet...... | WOTVAX::STONEG | Temperature Drop in Downtime Winterland.... | Mon Jan 31 1994 13:34 | 10 |
|
>>>>> Why? The benefit that I am receiving in kind is that of a 1.6 Cavalier and I am
>>>>> purchasing the extra benefit of a higher standard car with my own money.
^^^^^^^^^^^
-Mike-
Mike, it's not your money 'til you've paid the tax on it......
Graham
|
1829.61 | | WARNUT::ALLEN | It works better if you screw it in.. | Mon Jan 31 1994 14:30 | 18 |
| Hang on a mo.....
Hasn't Mike got a point here? Has anyone challenged the Taxman on this?
This also raises the question of leasing your own car. Do you get taxed as
having a benefit? If you purchase the car you don't get taxed for benefit, just
income tax.
I can understand if you are "given" a standard car by a company, which is the
way that many many companies operate, i.e. choose your car from this list...
But that isn't what happens here is it? We ar "given" a theoretical "standard"
car and WE pay for the upgrade. The extra we pay is already taxed at source
(income tax) (isn't it?) and thus are getting taxed twice.
I appreciate the naivety of this, but accountant I'm not and clarification seems
thin on the ground here.
Another Mike
|
1829.62 | | SUBURB::THOMASH | The Devon Dumpling | Mon Jan 31 1994 14:38 | 32 |
| >Why? The benefit that I am receiving in kind is that of a 1.6 Cavalier and I am
>purchasing the extra benefit of a higher standard car with my own money.
At the risk of repeating myself.
The benefit to you, in kind, is a car that you pay for out of
pre-tax money. The perk is you haven't paid tax on that money.
Full stop. That's it.
This may explain it to you.........
The Digital car scheme does not allow for you to pay x amount of
pre-tax money for the base car, and y amount of after tax money for
any extras/upgrade.
You pay 1 amount, and it's out of your pre-tax salary.
The taxman doesn't give a XXXX for whatever Digital bases the money
it gives you. whether it's salary, or for a car, or for anything else.
It does. however, get very interested in what you do with pre-tax money.
and what you are doing with it is buying a car, so they will tax
you on the car that you get with your pre-tax money.
....................I don't know how to be any clearer about this.
If you don't like it, take the money post tax, and fund your own. You
will then be taxed normally on the money, and the taxman will not give
a XXXX if you decide to buy a Cavalier or Astra or whatever with it.
Heather
|
1829.63 | | WARNUT::ALLEN | It works better if you screw it in.. | Mon Jan 31 1994 14:44 | 11 |
| Thankyou Heather,
OK the outstanding one is taking the money and leasing your own car. Someone in
this office has been told that whether you are taxed or not is on a case by case
basis.
By your description, you have paid tax at source, therefore there should be no
question of paying "benefit in kind". Seems the taxman can think otherwise.
Personally I don't give a four x, I came out and bought my own car but it does
intigue me.
|
1829.64 | | SUBURB::THOMASH | The Devon Dumpling | Mon Jan 31 1994 14:58 | 11 |
| >But that isn't what happens here is it? We ar "given" a theoretical "standard"
>car and WE pay for the upgrade. The extra we pay is already taxed at source
>(income tax) (isn't it?) and thus are getting taxed twice.
No. that's the point, none of the money you pay for the car is taxed at
source. None of it is taxed at all.
So the taxman taxes you on the car, the one you are paying for totally
from tax-free money.
Heather
|
1829.65 | | SUBURB::THOMASH | The Devon Dumpling | Mon Jan 31 1994 15:03 | 17 |
|
>OK the outstanding one is taking the money and leasing your own car. Someone in
>this office has been told that whether you are taxed or not is on a case by case
>basis.
I can't see how they could tax you, there's nowhere on the form for you
to tell the taxman what you do with your taxed money, leased or bought,
or spent on holiday or at the races.
>By your description, you have paid tax at source, therefore there should be no
>question of paying "benefit in kind". Seems the taxman can think otherwise.
I don't think so, unless you try to claim part of the cost as
business use, and try to claim some tax back. then each case is treated
individually
Heather
|
1829.66 | A car tax disk - for your computer | CHEFS::DEBNEYN | | Thu Feb 24 1994 15:08 | 14 |
| BMW have available a tax disk - for your IBM compat PC not your
windscreen! The program calculates the tax due for any make or model of
company car, giving both current and future liability.
And guess what, it also gives info on alternative BMW cars for similar
tax levels.
It's free, so call 0800-325600 specifying whether you want 3.5 or 5.25
inch diskette.
Mine's in the post, sounds an interesting little gimmick!
Nick
|
1829.67 | Had it for about a month | YUPPY::PATEMAN | Some Fantastic Place | Thu Feb 24 1994 15:30 | 19 |
| I have this on my PC and its quite useful. However, it has piece of
flawed logic.
Tax Year 93/4 works on price paid for car
Tax Year 94/5 works on list price
Therefore my BMW, purchase price #19k, list price for tax #19.5, was
inside the 19250 bracket and hence attracted low tax. However, the
diskette only accepts list price so it calculates my 93/4 tax as is I
was over 19250. This gives a false tax charge saying I'm better off
under the new regs when in fact I'm nearly a grand down! You can get
round it by running the option twice with the two different values but
it would have been easier to allow entry of different values for the
two tax years.
Otherwise - quite useful, but it won't run on my notebook with
pathworks installed!
Paul
|
1829.68 | | COMICS::PARRY | Trevor Parry | Fri Feb 25 1994 08:50 | 8 |
| >Tax Year 93/4 works on price paid for car
>Tax Year 94/5 works on list price
Is this what the tax office believe or what the PC believes to be true?
If it is what the tax office belive, what's the source of this
information?
tp
|
1829.69 | | ERMTRD::CLIFFE | I'll warp my own space-time ... | Fri Feb 25 1994 09:01 | 3 |
|
If this PC prog is freeware/shareware - any chance of zipping it up and
sticking it jon the network ??
|
1829.70 | | SAC::DARRALL_D | Durelli, Gripping Stuff !!! | Fri Feb 25 1994 10:01 | 10 |
| Just phoned BMW, very polite and efficient, with a postcode search
facility.
Seems like they are giving the disk away to build up a marketing
database.
Shareware were the cost of registration is your details on their
computer !
Dave D.
|
1829.71 | The Tax Rules are as follows.... | YUPPY::PATEMAN | Some Fantastic Place | Fri Feb 25 1994 14:04 | 15 |
| Ref -3
The tax rules in force for the past few years have been based on the
actual price paid for the car, ie less fleet discounts. Hence my BMW
falling just under the 19250 bracket.
The rules coming into force from April use the LIST PRICE of the car
plus extras costing over (I think) #200, but not dealer fit stuff like
radios and alarms. Fleet have advised me that the value of my car is
now around 19.4k (from memory)
The software only accepts one price input and where your price
fluctuates around the 19250 mark it can give false values.
Paul
|
1829.72 | On the net! | TOMMII::RDAVIES | Amateur Expert | Fri Feb 25 1994 14:16 | 12 |
| This is where the car meets the PC!.....
I've zipped and uploaded the disk onto TIMMII::SYS$PUBLIC:BMWZIP.EXE
Copy it and get it onto a PC. Run it to unzip itself (you don't
need the PKUNZIP, it's self extracting).
Then run the resulting exe file, BMW.EXE It is a DOS based program,
but it'll run within windows.
Richard
|
1829.73 | | COMICS::PARRY | Trevor Parry | Fri Feb 25 1994 15:45 | 6 |
| re: .71
Sorry, I misread your note from my viewpoint i.e. a car worth a lot
less than �19250.
tp
|
1829.74 | Rip Off !!!! | NEWOA::CROME_A | | Fri Feb 25 1994 16:46 | 23 |
| How's this for a blooming rip off !
Astra GSi - price paid inc delivery, plates, tax, VAT, fuel, everything �14614.02
Tax office's price �15754.29 !!!!!
Thats �1140.27 more than it cost to pay tax on !
Which in my book means I'm being taken for a ride to the tune of nearly �140,
by the time you've worked it all through the equation.
I know the tax office can do what ever they like, but this really annoys me.
Especially when you realize they are triple taxing you on the car tax paid when
the car is purchased:
Buy car pay car tax.
Pay VAT on car tax
Now taxed on VAT on car tax
I can safely say there will be a few more notes of this flavour when the new tax
codes come out and people start investigating.
Andy_who_is_mighty_p****d_off
|
1829.75 | | WOTVAX::FIDDLERM | The sense of being dulls my mind | Fri Feb 25 1994 16:54 | 8 |
| re-1
How did you get the Tax office price of �15754.29? I've been doing
all my calculations based on list price plus extras plus vat, etc. Can
you phone them and ask them for what price they are using and how they
arrive at it?
Mikef
|
1829.76 | | COMICS::PARRY | Trevor Parry | Fri Feb 25 1994 16:59 | 7 |
| RE: .-1
Would it help in this case ? The price is about right for a GSi a
couple of years old. They have come down in price over the last few
years.
tp (expecting roughly the same :-(
|
1829.77 | | COMICS::SHELLEY | Bugs B Gone | Fri Feb 25 1994 17:10 | 9 |
| It wouldn't surprise me if this 'tax on list price' is scrapped because
it is just so difficult for the tax office to match all the list
prices. I can't believe they are taking the list price of a car say in
1990 and using that for all cars registered since then. It is only fair
to charge against the list price of the car at purchase time and the
only way they could confirm this would be to contact every manufacturer
on earth to get the correct prices.
Royston
|
1829.78 | I sympathise with all your negative tax code numbers! But I'm smiling now! | CMOTEC::POWELL | Nostalgia isn't what it used to be, is it? | Mon Feb 28 1994 12:34 | 10 |
|
Buy your own car and come out of the Cocar scheme!
Not only do I get the �2950.00 (taxable, I know), but my tax code number
has gone from something large and negative (nearly 200, I think) to plus 194 at
the moment, but from 6th April, it goes up to 496-ish!
Makes me glad I came out of the scheme.
Malcolm. 8-)))))))))))
|
1829.79 | | SUBURB::THOMASH | The Devon Dumpling | Mon Feb 28 1994 12:44 | 5 |
| And don't forget you can claim tax back on the proportion of your car
costs you use for business......deprectiation, petrol, servicing,
insurance, cartax..........
Heather
|
1829.80 | More Info.?? | SEDOAS::BRISTOW_A | | Mon Feb 28 1994 12:59 | 15 |
| re .-1
Heather,
Do you have a spreadsheet of more details, of what you can claim and
how ?
Could you drop me a mail or send me some info @ESO.
Cheers
Andy
(Who is moving to London and will probably drop well below the 18K
miles) !
|
1829.81 | | WOTVAX::FIDDLERM | The sense of being dulls my mind | Mon Feb 28 1994 13:21 | 7 |
| HI all - anyone out there have the Vauxhall Price Guide (the current
one, I think it changes next week?). I'm trying to find the list price
of the Cavalier GLS 1.7TD.
TA
NMikef
|
1829.82 | | SUBURB::THOMASH | The Devon Dumpling | Mon Feb 28 1994 13:46 | 14 |
| There's a form to fill in from the taxman
Basically, if you do 4,000 business, and 6,000 private, you can claim
4/10ths........ (40%) of all costs of anything to do with the car.
Phone up the Taxman and ask for a form.
give me a call - 7-830 4970,
or mail me Suburb::thomash, or Heather Thomas @reo
If you need any help filling it in.
Heather
|
1829.83 | I'm still smiling! | CMOTEC::POWELL | Nostalgia isn't what it used to be, is it? | Mon Feb 28 1994 14:02 | 17 |
|
>>> And don't forget you can claim tax back on the proportion of your car
>>> costs you use for business......deprectiation, petrol, servicing,
>>> insurance, cartax..........
>>> Heather
I should be so lucky!!! Since I left Field Service, as it was called,
I drive a desk and don't get out of the office at all to speak of. I don't think
I've done 500 miles in any of the 4 years since I took this job, but still manage
to do 15,000 miles a year. Two return trips to Gibralta and the Algarve account
for about half that too.
Thanks for the advice though.
Malcolm.
|
1829.84 | Diesel drivers unite ! | COMICS::SHELLEY | Bugs B Gone | Mon Feb 28 1994 14:44 | 8 |
| re .81 (Cavalier GLS 1.7TD)
The June '93 price list shows it at �13020. You should add �500 on the
road cost plus _any_ extras (including met paint).
My car (Cav 17.TD LS) works out about right against this price list.
Royston
|
1829.85 | | WOTVAX::FIDDLERM | The sense of being dulls my mind | Mon Feb 28 1994 14:56 | 12 |
| re-1
Thanks Royston. Did that include VAT? I'm trying to find the cost of
the pearlescent paint, ABS, and passenger airbags right now. I
actually get the beast tomorrow morning, so I shall be sitting in my
little cloud of black smoke on the Thelwell viaduct tomorrow evening.
I did work out all of this cost before, but the Tax Office have adopted
a standerd 2990 value, and asked me to go find out the full cost for
them so that they can adapt my tax code again!
Mikef
|
1829.86 | BMW.EXE Not Working | BELFST::MULLAN | | Mon Feb 28 1994 16:01 | 11 |
| re .72 BMWZIP.EXE
I copied it over, downloaded it to a PC, un-zipped it, and when I type
BMW, it clears the screen, the disk thrashes about a bit and then
nothing, zilch, zippo.......
Can the disk be used more than once or is at a once only per user? Or
have I finally lost it?
Gerry.
|
1829.87 | | VANGA::KERRELL | The first word in DECUS is Digital | Tue Mar 01 1994 07:49 | 15 |
| re.84:
I have one of them and Fleet put adifferent value on it, some extracts from
the draft P11D follow;
NOTE FOR ALL DRIVERS
The List Price of your current car has been added to the
report. This is the value that the Tax Office will use to
calculate car tax for tax year 94/95.
L461HJM CAVALIER 1.7TD GLS 5DR 5SPD 22 DEC 93 21 DEC 96 1700 10438
^^^^^
Dave.
|
1829.88 | | WAYOUT::LOAT | Stop throwing those bloody spears! | Tue Mar 01 1994 08:42 | 28 |
|
re .-1
�I have one of them and Fleet put adifferent value on it, some extracts from
�the draft P11D follow;
�
� NOTE FOR ALL DRIVERS
� The List Price of your current car has been added to the
� report. This is the value that the Tax Office will use to
� calculate car tax for tax year 94/95.
�
�L461HJM CAVALIER 1.7TD GLS 5DR 5SPD 22 DEC 93 21 DEC 96 1700 10438
� ^^^^^
Well, on mine, this is the capital cost, not the list price. Check a
couple of lines above. It's hidden to the right, so you can't see it
unless you're reading in 132 column mode, or use Gold-Right arrow to
move to the right a few times.
I read mine which said Cap. Cost 11216 (It's a ZX 1.9 Turbo D.), but
then I read the line above it, which said List Price �12,575.47!! I
don;t think it costs that now!.
Any ideas what other 'hidden' costs they are taking into consideration?
Delivery Charges etc.?
Steve.
|
1829.89 | | COMICS::MCSKEANE | Circus Games | Tue Mar 01 1994 09:01 | 6 |
|
'The List Price of RENAULT 19 16V 4DRSALOON is #13,657.24' did seem a bit
steep to me too!!!!!
POL.
|
1829.90 | ...but the cost was only �9843 ! | COMICS::SHELLEY | Bugs B Gone | Tue Mar 01 1994 09:06 | 14 |
| Don't forget to include the 'on the road' charges of about �500.
Mine works out about right.
Cav 1.7 TD LS - �12,660
The list price is 11,900 + 160 for a tow bar + 190 pearl.paint + on the
road costs.
Royston
PS I get the feeling quite a few folks are a bit shocked at the p11d
prices that are going around.
|
1829.91 | | WOTVAX::FIDDLERM | The sense of being dulls my mind | Tue Mar 01 1994 11:24 | 6 |
| re the last few
Anyone know exactly what is included in the #500 on the road/delivery
cost?
Mikef
|
1829.92 | | SUBURB::FRENCHS | Semper in excernere | Tue Mar 01 1994 12:34 | 2 |
| Full tank of fuel for a start I expect, then the cost of a valet
plus...
|
1829.93 | | WOTVAX::FIDDLERM | The sense of being dulls my mind | Tue Mar 01 1994 12:45 | 6 |
| re-1
Thats what I thought, but I don't think a full tank is included (well,
the one I got this morning had only a little fuel in it).
Mikef
|
1829.94 | | WELSWS::HEDLEY | Lager Lout | Tue Mar 01 1994 13:32 | 4 |
| apparently #12,622 for a Rover 214 SLi. That's the most expensive example
I've seen so far!
Chris.
|
1829.95 | Darn these PC's | TOMMII::RDAVIES | Amateur Expert | Tue Mar 01 1994 14:37 | 7 |
| RE .86,
Gerry I tried this and got the same thing!. Eventually I re-created the
package from scratch and have unzipped it and run the result successfully
so I don't know what went wrong, but blow away your copy and copy it over
again.!
Richard
|
1829.96 | Tax is on List Price | MILE::JENKINS | Norfolk enchance | Tue Mar 01 1994 18:43 | 5 |
|
Delivery charge should NOT be included. It is additional to the list
price of the car.
Richard.
|
1829.97 | | VANGA::KERRELL | The first word in DECUS is Digital | Wed Mar 02 1994 08:16 | 6 |
| re.88:
You're right! I could not have looked properly or it was wishful thinking! The
real number is �13,530.00
Dave.
|
1829.98 | | COMICS::SHELLEY | Bugs B Gone | Wed Mar 02 1994 09:05 | 9 |
| �Delivery charge should NOT be included.
If this is the case then a lot of us are being done.
If the it is based on the list price at delivery time, mine is
definately wrong.
Who do we complain to ? Car fleet or the tax office ?
Royston
|
1829.99 | If only we could write our own tax codes ! | NEWOA::CROME_A | | Wed Mar 02 1994 09:29 | 8 |
| �Delivery charge should NOT be included
The only problem here is that you cannot buy a car with out paying a
delivery charge unless you import it yourself. This has been a bone of contention
for some time now, certain bodies are saying this should be included in the list
price or the list price increased to cover it.
Andy
|
1829.100 | | MILBRN::CARTER_A | Rozan Kobar! | Wed Mar 02 1994 10:46 | 8 |
| re:.94
and the flexi-roof version is �14,339.81. Actually I was working on
around �14000 which it was priced as in various motor magazines at the
time, so I suppose the extra is the on-the-road-ness factor. One of the
reasons for getting this car was the 1400cc & uder tax break. Oh bum.
Andy (whose tax code has dropped by 100)
|
1829.101 | | COMICS::MCSKEANE | Circus Games | Wed Mar 02 1994 10:51 | 12 |
|
re 1829.89
>The List Price of RENAULT 19 16V 4DRSALOON is #13,657.24
I just phoned Herds of Basingstoke to check on the above figure. They
quoted a proce of 12635 for the car, 570 for delivery, etc, and 195 for
metallic blue paint, making a total of 13400. So car fleets quote
wasn't quite as steep as I originally thought (though its still an
extra 90 quid on my taxable benefits)
POL.
|
1829.102 | Booklet free from the tax office | COMICS::SHELLEY | Bugs B Gone | Wed Mar 02 1994 11:10 | 15 |
| This may clarify things a bit.
From ' Income tax and company cars April 94'...
How is the price calculated for tax purposes
. Manufacturers list price
. taxes (VAT, car tax if appropriate) but not road tax. *
. delivery charges (incl VAT)
. + accessories
* I don't know what this is or how it is worked out.
Royston
|
1829.103 | | WELSWS::HEDLEY | Lager Lout | Wed Mar 02 1994 11:15 | 9 |
| Is it just me, or is it a tad unfair that the new tax rules have been
applied restrospectively to all existing company cars, instead of just
affecting new ones from the date of its implementation? Talk about
moving the goalposts...
Re. Andy, if your code has `only' dropped by 100 you're one of the
lucky ones!
Chris (with severely negative tax code, but not as bad as some)
|
1829.104 | Tax not retrospective on accessories | RDGE44::ALEUC1 | Barry Gates, 7830-1155 | Wed Mar 02 1994 11:30 | 10 |
| I think the new tax rules don't apply to any accessories fitted to a car
before april 1993. So, the tax rules are only applied retrospectively to the
list price of the car. I also have the leaflet somewhere so I will try
to post the correct wording sometime.
This scheme does seem very unfair on employees who are allowed to buy
secondhand cars as their company car (I know this doesn't apply to
Digital employees but it does for other companies and contractors).
Barry.
|
1829.105 | Just wondering | FUTURS::CROSSLEY | For internal use only | Wed Mar 02 1994 11:51 | 35 |
|
I'm thick, so please bare with me.
> The engine capacity breaks are :
>
> upto 1400cc
> 1401 - 2000cc
> over 2000cc
>
> The capital cost breaks are :
>
> upto 19250
> 19251 - 29000
> over 29001
>
P11D info
> Engine Size Cap. Cost
> ----------- -----------
>old car 1600 10031
>new car 2000 14162
This says to me that I should be in the same tax position as I was
before, but this isn't the case.
Where am I going wrong ????
Ian, severely negative tax code 8-(
|
1829.106 | Who said this was going to be fair? | MILBRN::EATON_N | Personal Name Removed to Save Costs | Wed Mar 02 1994 12:00 | 10 |
| Ian,
You're not comparing like with like. They have changed the whole basis
of company car taxation, which is now based on the list price of your
car.
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for them. 8^(
Nigel
|
1829.107 | | SUBURB::FRENCHS | Semper in excernere | Wed Mar 02 1994 12:12 | 8 |
| RE:
. taxes (VAT, car tax if appropriate) but not road tax. *
Looks like you poor folks are now being taxed on a tax that you had to pay out
in the first place.
Simon
|
1829.108 | | MILBRN::62664::dodd | | Wed Mar 02 1994 12:23 | 12 |
| re .104
Why is it unfair that some companies buy secondhand. My wife is one such
person. Company bought a 6 month old Saab 9000 CS turbo, Gill pays tax on the
full list price even though on the previous tax regime it was under 19250.
If it is unfair at all then it is unfair to them not us.
The price used doesn't really matter. The government aims to raise x pounds
of tax. To do this they have decided to base tax benefit on 35% of list
price. Would you have felt better if it had been 50% of price paid?
Andrew
|
1829.109 | | FUTURS::CROSSLEY | For internal use only | Wed Mar 02 1994 12:43 | 9 |
|
r.e. .106
Hi Nigel,
so why did they go to the trouble of telling me what the Capital Breaks
were if they aren't worth diddly squat ???
Ian.
|
1829.110 | | RDGE44::ALEUC1 | Barry Gates, 7830-1155 | Wed Mar 02 1994 13:08 | 9 |
| Re: 108
Well, I suppose you are right as the government is taxing you on the
benefit of driving a company car and the benefit is the same whether
your company paid �20,000 new price or �10,000 used price - the only
benefit you lose is the "benefit" of driving a new car. Its up to the
individual to quantify how important that is.
Barry.
|
1829.111 | | BAHTAT::EATON_N | Personal Name Removed to Save Costs | Wed Mar 02 1994 13:22 | 14 |
| re .109
Well, the new regime kicks in in April, so the breaks are still
applicable as of today. Your coding notice will be for the code that
will apply as of April.
C'mon everyone, this is *tax law* we're talking here. It ain't fair, it
don't make sense, and I hate it. But it's what our betters have decided
for us, and they wouldn't lie to us, would they? 8^(
And I still didn't vote for "the party of low taxation" (sic)
Nigel
|
1829.112 | disagree ! | NEWOA::FIDO_T | Conation is the key | Wed Mar 02 1994 15:36 | 8 |
| I beg to differ here - this is one area where the tax laws ARE moving
the right way. Basing the taxation on the value of the benefit has got
to be correct. What else could be fairer ?
Whether it should be 35% or not or whether it should be applied
retrospectively are totally different matters.
Terry
|
1829.113 | Disagree with your disagree ! 8^) | BAHTAT::EATON_N | Personal Name Removed to Save Costs | Wed Mar 02 1994 15:40 | 13 |
|
The retrospective thing is *one* of the things that really upsets me.
There are a whole bunch of others, but this is one. If they wanted to
be really fair (*if*), then they'd tax each of us as if the monthly
lease cost of the vehicle was cash. Then I wouldn't argue with at least
this aspect of current taxation policy. But they have (in typical
current style) managed to change a bad system to a worse one.
Why am I annoyed? Did I seriously expect anything better?
Nigel
|
1829.114 | re rover 214 | UKEDU::BUSHEN_P | I've won a paper clip!!!! | Wed Mar 02 1994 19:09 | 12 |
| >================================================================================
>Note 1829.100 NEW TAX BENEFIT VALUES 100 of 109
>MILBRN::CARTER_A "Rozan Kobar!" 8 lines 2-MAR-1994 10:46
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy
mine was �13,790.00 - it has no options. Do you have �548.82 worth of options?
cheers,
Paul.
|
1829.115 | | YUPPY::CARTER | Windows on the world... | Wed Mar 02 1994 23:37 | 9 |
| Well... maybe I'm glad I left to go to college and handed back the
co car.... can't see me rejoining the scheme... I like my new tax code
too much!! and I worked out to keep the same amount of money in my
pocket I'd have to drive a 1.2 Corsa rather than my 1.8 Astra CD...
Xtine
ps. I am currently driving my mum's 1.1 Fiesta... and its great!!
|
1829.116 | Re.113. | CMOTEC::POWELL | Nostalgia isn't what it used to be, is it? | Thu Mar 03 1994 12:14 | 25 |
|
>>> There are a whole bunch of others, but this is one. If they wanted to
>>> be really fair (*if*), then they'd tax each of us as if the monthly
>>> lease cost of the vehicle was cash.
If they wanted to be really fair, they would tax you on not only the
lease cost of the car,
but the insurance cost,
the servicing cost, the
replacement car whilst yours is being serviced/repaired cost
etc. etc. etc.
That would be an administrative nightmare, so I suppose that the one
you are stuck with from April is about as fair as you are going to get from any
Government.
You have to remember that it was declared years ago, that the cocar
is to be taxed at it's full benefit value, so you can expect fine tuning (ie.
increases) in the tax in the future.
I'm just glad I got out - with my tax code of 400 plus from next April!
Tee Hee!
Malcolm.
|
1829.117 | | COMICS::SHELLEY | Bugs B Gone | Thu Mar 03 1994 12:22 | 6 |
| Malcolm, I take your point but just to nit pick, the lease cost
does cover the cost of relief vehicles (whilst off the road for
mechanical repair or servicing) and servicing costs. However, as
you say the insurance is a seperate issue.
Royston
|
1829.118 | Re.116/117. | CMOTEC::POWELL | Nostalgia isn't what it used to be, is it? | Thu Mar 03 1994 12:31 | 11 |
|
Sorry Royston if I'm wrong, but up until the time I left Field Service
(as it was then), the Lease ONLY covered the cost of a replacement car if
the cocar was off the road for service/repair for MORE than 24 hours. It may
have changed now.
When I wrote service/repair, the repair of which I was thinking was
accident repair, not the sort that the garage does in order to keep the car
on the road - that sort of repair definitely is NOT covered by the lease.
Malcolm.
|
1829.119 | | WELSWS::HEDLEY | Lager Lout | Thu Mar 03 1994 13:03 | 9 |
| re .116,
Digital seems to reckon that the cash value of my car is #3055, which,
although it doesn't include insurance, I guess it does include most of
the various sundry items. If what you suggest was the case, I can't help
feeling that I would be taxed on somewhat less than the #4500 that
the Government reckons my car's worth.
Chris.
|
1829.120 | | KERNEL::MCGOWAN | | Thu Mar 03 1994 13:20 | 10 |
| extracted (without permission :-) ) from the Inland RevenueCar
benefits leaflet:
Manufacturers list price - "The price on the day before the date of
first registration, including VAT, car tax (where appropriate) and
delivery charges"
i.e. not todays list price !
Pete
|
1829.121 | My 2� | NEEPS::IRVINE | Sobriety has it's own drawbacks! | Thu Mar 03 1994 13:54 | 17 |
| This I do not understand....
Every Co Car driver is being taxed on their car.
There are a large number of Co Car drivers who cannot do business
without their co Car. Sales, MCS, s/ware support (field), etc...
It would make sense to me that Authorised Co Car Users (i.e. those who
need a car to do the job they are employed for), should be taxed on the
additional money the spend towards their car. If the Base car required
to do the job is a Cav 1.6 L, and you wanna drive a Beemer, then you
pay the tax on the additional amount you spend on the co car.
This would really tax those for whom a Co Car is nothing more than a
perk!
Bob
|
1829.122 | | NEWOA::FIDO_T | Conation is the key | Thu Mar 03 1994 14:25 | 18 |
| ... but ALL company cars are perks if they are used for anything but
work, which DOESN'T include travelling to and from work. Therefore, they
are bound to be taxed.
What the new scheme does is tax in a consistent way ( i.e. the value
of the car, not the engine size as in previous years, is taxed ). It can't
have been correct that I used to pay the same tax for my Golf GTi as
people who had, for example, an Astra 1.6L and a BMW 318i. Under the old
system, those three cars were all taxed identically ( provided that the
BMW costs less than �19,250 - not sure if it did, but you get the point ).
The correct way around Bob's point in .121 is for Authorised Car
Users to use pool cars which must be left at the office. These cars are
not treated as perks ( because they are ONLY being used for work ) and
are therefore not taxed.
Terry
|
1829.123 | | NEEPS::IRVINE | Sobriety has it's own drawbacks! | Fri Mar 04 1994 09:29 | 24 |
| But this does not get round the problem.... in MCS most engineers have
to work standby (working on an on-call rota), this effectively means an
engineer can be expected to work anywhere at anytime within the
geography. Pool cars simply would not work! Given that the average
travel time to a customer site may be more than doubled, by going to
the office to collect a pool car, this would do our customers, and in
turn the taxman no good at all (company tax down from digital because
we loose contracts, because we cannot get to the customer site in a
reasonable time scale). This also would not address the problem of
employees who work from home (100+ miles from the nearest office).
It does not matter which angle you look at it from, we are all being
taxed simply because the taxman cannot exclude those for whom a CO car
is simply a perk, and those who require a car to do their daily
business.
Bob
(I know this sounds bad but this has always been a bee in my bonnet, it
would be simpler by far if companies who provide co cars to their
employees had to declare if "a" car is required to do their work, if it
is and you choose to upgrade the car you sould pay tax on the
difference in price between the base car (perhaps a nationally agreed
base car) and the car chosen. If not, you pay tax on the full whack!)
|
1829.124 | | NEWOA::FIDO_T | Conation is the key | Fri Mar 04 1994 09:42 | 11 |
| Bob,
I am NOT saying that some people do not need a car to do their
work. However, if they take it home and use it for ANYTHING other than
work, it is bound to be seen as a perk ( however small ).
It is difficult to differentiate between those who need a car for
work and those who don't, but surely the 2,500 mile and 18,000 mile
thresholds start to address that area.
Terry
|
1829.125 | | LARVAE::JORDAN | Chris Jordan, TSE - Technology Services, End-User Computing | Fri Mar 04 1994 11:48 | 13 |
| .120� Manufacturers list price - "The price on the day before the date of
.120� first registration, including VAT, car tax (where appropriate) and
.120� delivery charges"
This can be a killer..... It means that if you order a car, and then
the price rises during the wait for delivery, then you get stung for
the new price in your tax (even though the cost to you of the car
doesn't change). With deliveries in the range of 4 or 5 months, it is
very likely to change....
I deliberately chose a car at list price < 13,000 this time last year.
I am now taxed on a car that is apparently worth > 14,250.
|
1829.126 | | WARNUT::ALLEN | It works better if you screw it in.. | Fri Mar 04 1994 12:32 | 5 |
| .124 touches on a problem that my father used to get round. He used to
pay a certain amount of money per mile for use of a company car for
personal use. Does anyone know if this is still recognised by the tax
man as a valid getout and if so why don't we offer this as an
alternative?
|
1829.127 | It IS a perk! | TOMMII::RDAVIES | Amateur Expert | Fri Mar 04 1994 13:28 | 18 |
| .last at least shows some sense!.
This is just a re-hash of a discussion that's been going on for eternity.
You get the use of a car. You 'pay' for it out of an allowance and maybe
some of your salary, but BEFORE YOU PAY TAX ON IT therefore it is a
tax-free PERK!.
If you were to pay for it out of your TAXABLE salary, then every pound
you pay would be deducted from the car tax liability. This is STILL TRUE.
IF you want to complain about it being unfair, some need their car some
don't etc etc... it doesn't hold any water unless you take the above into
account.
In the end the amount of income tax you pay isn't a lot different.
Richard
|
1829.128 | | WELSWS::HEDLEY | Lager Lout | Mon Mar 07 1994 12:05 | 20 |
| >apparently #12,622 for a Rover 214 SLi. That's the most expensive example
>I've seen so far!
oh well, I got a breakdown of this cost, which explains the high price
a bit more clearly. I thought I may as well post it, on the off chance
that anyone's interested...
Base cost 9670.71
Stereo 157.12
Car Tax 409.50
Delivery 260.00
Plates 15.00
Car Mats 10.00 -- Cheap, and obviously so!
Alarm 220.00
VAT 1879.91
groovy, so I pay additional income tax on the value added tax charged on
car tax. Bummer.
Chris.
|
1829.129 | | VANGA::KERRELL | The first word in DECUS is Digital | Mon Mar 07 1994 12:16 | 7 |
| re.12:
Do we pay tax on an alarm if it was Digital fitted and not driver requested?
I hope not.
Dave.
|
1829.130 | �1 per month saving | WELCLU::KINGI | Don't call me Wayne or Joe | Mon Mar 07 1994 16:04 | 13 |
|
re .-1
I think you probably do !!!
I seem to be in a minority, my 1.6L cavalier gives mean a taxable
benefit of 2950 as opposed to 2990 on the old scale.
regards,
Ian
|
1829.131 | Tax Div. | KERNEL::WITHALLG | We Don't Do Duvets ....... | Wed Apr 26 1995 14:37 | 31 |
|
Hi Tax Heads,
can someone in the know tell me how much I pay in tax per year for my
car.
(a) Make and Model (i) GT NON T-BAR SPOTOYO (ii) 5DR 95 VAUX
MR2 ASTRA
List Price 17572.00 14450.00
Appropriate benefit charge for car shown at (i) above........ 2695.98
Appropriate benefit charge for car shown at (ii) above....... 1690.45
Txable Benefit 4386.43
miles - 1994/1995 : 1369
car i driven until 120994
car ii from 051294
Figure in �notes pls. IE. this year you will pay --
next year with 0 miles you will pay --
Many thanks
Gary
|
1829.132 | | BIRMVX::HILLN | It's OK, it'll be dark by nightfall | Wed Apr 26 1995 17:36 | 17 |
| You should pay tax at your marginal rate on the value of the car
benefit.
For the two cars that you list, for the time you had them, I calculated
the Car Benefit according to tax booklet IR 133 as:
(i) 35% of the list price, for 5/12 year = �2563
(ii) 35% 4/12 = �1686
total = �4249
which are a bit less than the figures you listed.
As you don't appear to have clocked up 2,500 business miles there's no
reduction for mileage.
So, if you pay some of your tax at 40%, this will cost you �1699.60.
You can do the arithmetic for other tax rates, I'm sure.
|
1829.133 | | COMICS::PARRY | Trevor Parry | Wed Apr 26 1995 18:21 | 14 |
| Gary's figures were from the P11D so this bit worried me...
>which are a bit less than the figures you listed.
So I checked mine. The car list price is 15548. The car was mine from
13/9/93 to 2/2/95 and the business miles is 3095.
So I did (15548 *35/100) * (2/3) and get 3627.87 never mind the fact
that the car isn't listed as being mine for all the tax year.
Where's the anomaly, have I done my sums wrong ?
thanks,
tmp
|
1829.134 | | MILE::JENKINS | | Wed Apr 26 1995 19:44 | 12 |
|
>> Appropriate benefit charge for car shown at (i) above........ 2695.98
>> Appropriate benefit charge for car shown at (ii) above....... 1690.45
Txable Benefit 4386.43
Is this section on your P11D always shown as the '35% of list price'
number whatever mileage you have done?
Thanks,
Richard.
|
1829.135 | | KERNEL::WITHALLG | We Don't Do Duvets ....... | Fri Apr 28 1995 11:11 | 15 |
|
re <<< Note 1829.132 by BIRMVX::HILLN >>>
>> if you pay some of your tax at 40%, this will cost you �1699.60.
Thats a lot of money.... anyhows I rang a mate of mine at PAYE in
Guildford and he worked it out for me at approx �60 a month - thats
�720 a year ??.
Curious.
GAry
|
1829.136 | taxmen do it every day | MARVIN::ILETT | | Fri Apr 28 1995 15:20 | 45 |
| We're taxed by the day (and night !) :-
You had the cars for the following days:
April May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr
car 1 : 25 31 30 31 31 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 = 160 days
car 2 : 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 31 28 31 6 = 122 days
so taxable benefit works out as
car 1 17572 * 35 * 159
-- --- == 2695.97
100 365
car 2 14450 * 35 * 122
-- --- == 1690.45
100 365
which is roughly what the payroll folks got.
Total tax
benefit = 2695.97 + 1690.45 = 4386.42
Now how you choose to see that as a cost to you depends to some extent on what
you earn.
The method I use is to ADD the total tax benefit to my salary and other income
to come up with a total income figure. From this total income I take off the
FULL single person's allowance (because I'm single) and then apportion the next
slice to tax at 20%, the next bit at 25% with any left over costing me 40% tax.
I add up the tax bits, take them off the total income to see what's left.
What the tax man tends to do is to TAKE OFF the tax value from your tax free
allowance (to land you with a negative code if you are single) and then does
similar sums.
So for people paying tax at 40% the tax benefit costs you more than if you only
pay at 25%. (of course if you are paying tax at 40% it costs you less to spend
your cash on a car before the taxman sees it than if you're paying tax at 25% -
but that's another story).
4386.42 * 0.25 = 1096.60 = 91 per month
4386.42 * 0.40 = 1754.40 = 146 per month
Phil.
|
1829.137 | | KERNEL::WITHALLG | We Don't Do Duvets ....... | Fri Apr 28 1995 16:02 | 12 |
|
VTX 36 Finance (inc Payroll & Expenses)
is not available to help me with P11d queries.. So..
What is included in section B no3
Travelling and Subsistence ............................?
Gary
|
1829.138 | Where's my TVT ? | KERNEL::WITHALLG | We Don't Do Duvets ....... | Fri Apr 28 1995 16:37 | 10 |
|
FTWGAS
Astra 1.7td std cost 14450 (Db's CD alarm) Drivers cost 3038
is �105.36 per month (�1264.37 yr) to the tax man for drivers <2500 miles.
14450 x35/100 = 5057.50 *0.25 =1264.20
Ouch.
|
1829.139 | | LARVAE::JORDAN | Chris Jordan, MS BackOffice Centre, UK | Sun Apr 30 1995 21:58 | 7 |
| Remember that the 35% of the list cost is if you do less than 2,500
miles a year.
It is x% less if you do 2,500 to 18,000 miles a year.
And y% less if you do over 18,000....
Where x and y are some defined figure, like 33 and 66% (I think!)
|
1829.140 | | CHEFS::BRIGGS_R | they use computers don't they | Tue Jan 23 1996 11:09 | 7 |
|
Can anyone tell me whether the tax values listed in .0 are still valid?
If they are note, where is the latest and greatest info on how to work
out tax liability on a car?
Richard
|
1829.141 | not sure about .0 but.... | WOTVAX::STONEG | Temperature Drop in Downtime Winterland.... | Tue Jan 23 1996 11:21 | 10 |
|
Richard,
the taxable benefit is 35% of List price (incl. VAT & delivery
charges), you then get a discount of 33% on this if you do over 2500
miles/yr or 66% if you do over 18000 miles/yr.
This is explained in the booklet you get with your new Tax code.
Graham
|
1829.142 | | CHEFS::BRIGGS_R | they use computers don't they | Tue Jan 23 1996 15:22 | 6 |
|
Thanks, must retrieve athat booklet which I remember seeing now you
mention it.
Richard
|