Property Letting - allowable expenses
Options
Comments
-
To give a specific example, a client of mine (I am an accountant) had a chalet in Chamonix. She made 5 or so trips there a year.
Two were on her own and on each she had a lot of appointments with property agents, cleaners, repairers and so on. No skiing. In my view no ancillary purpose, so we claimed all the expenses relating to these trips.
The other trips were for her whole family and involved skiing. Clear ancillary purpose, so not claimed as business expense.
Any chance you can offer an opinion on this one?..
Rental property at the other end of the country, and during renovations I rptravelled up first class on the train once a month to supervise, inspect, direct etc.
Each time I stayed at my parents’ house nearby, rather than in a hotel.
Do you think that that would be allowable?0 -
possible provided you are able to convince HMRC that your daytime was spent on the property business and the mere fact you stayed with your parents and spoke to them in the evenings was irrelevant. Also of course how long you stayed would be an important factor if you only spent 1 day on site but stayed 3 nights for example?Any chance you can offer an opinion on this one?..
Rental property at the other end of the country, and during renovations I rptravelled up first class on the train once a month to supervise, inspect, direct etc.
Each time I stayed at my parents’ house nearby, rather than in a hotel.
Do you think that that would be allowable?0 -
possible provided you are able to convince HMRC that your daytime was spent on the property business and the mere fact you stayed with your parents and spoke to them in the evenings was irrelevant. Also of course how long you stayed would be an important factor if you only spent 1 day on site but stayed 3 nights for example?
Agree with this - HMRC would argue duality of purpose. It would be to prove that your motivation, intent, etc was the property, and not visiting your parents. The pattern of visits before and after the renovation would need to be very different. Ie if you went to your parents once a year before and after, but monthly during the renovations, then you have a strong argument, but it you always go monthly, before, during and after, you'd probably not be allowed any of the visits.0 -
I think they would also question why you travelled first class rather than standard class!0
-
no they would not, the principle is the same even if the rules are those for employeesCheeky_Monkey wrote: »I think they would also question why you travelled first class rather than standard class!
https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/employment-income-manual/eim31835
For example,you should not refuse a deduction for first class rail travel, if that has been incurred, on the basis that the same journey could have been made more cheaply in standard class.0 -
On the life insurance and similar protection policies, everyone wants to claim this as a business expense. But funnily enough in my experience clients and their beneficiaries, where they have claimed insurance premia as business expenses, have a tendency to get upset when the proceeds of claims are then treated as business income.
You can't have this both ways.Hideous Muddles from Right Charlies0 -
possible provided you are able to convince HMRC that your daytime was spent on the property business and the mere fact you stayed with your parents and spoke to them in the evenings was irrelevant. Also of course how long you stayed would be an important factor if you only spent 1 day on site but stayed 3 nights for example?
Thanks. It was two nights each time, up after work, day and a half on site, then back home in the afternoon.
Apologies for hijacking the thread...0 -
If they did the answer would be that it is much nicer...Cheeky_Monkey wrote: »I think they would also question why you travelled first class rather than standard class!
Although (as my presence here should show), money saving matters to me, I no longer like travelling standard class on the trains. Too many groups of lads in their twenties acting like I did when I was a young lad in my twenties...0 -
I can't seem to respond to a post. But Another Joe you asked how this wasn't personal.
What I was referring to was that the life insurance sum is solely for the buy to let mortgage, it would not cover my residential mortgage or a sum of money left to my spouse or dependent. It's purely business.
And Chrismac1 I would assume that with any buy to let property when it came to sell it whether the owner was alive or not there would be CGT and/or inheritance tax to pay. Business and self assessment are slightly different kettle of fish though. My understanding is that insurance is an allowable expense for businesses in order to cover any loss of income if that insured person were to die. As with what seems to be the case for small fry landlords like myself, ie those who don't have property in a limited company, there are the opposite rules - if I were to die my family would have a loss of income as the property would no longer be mine, and my beneficiary may or may not be able to get a mortgage.
Thank you for your responses.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.1K Life & Family
- 247.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards