Conference terri::cars_uk

    
    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

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.

    Some of us *have* to take the car and ain't allowed the cash.

	I suggest you all check your P11D's VERY carefully next year.


	Heather

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

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
									

>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.
	

    
    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?

    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) 
    

    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......       ;-)

    
>    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    

    
    
    
    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 ?                                                 

    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.

    .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

>    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
    

    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.

    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

    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

    
    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
    

    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

Did the article say if these bands still attract the 50% 150% for +18k -2.5K 
company milage?

Richard

    re.28 Yes.

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

    Yes, the proposal did state that there would be 50% and 150% allowances
    based on company miles (at 2,500 and 18,000).
    
    	Rik

    
    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.
    

    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

    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.

    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.

Is it true that company supplied car phones are now taxed as a benefit as well?

Dave.

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.

    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

Any idea how this tax is calculated?

Dave.

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.

    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

    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

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.

    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

>  This is really not as onerous as it may at first seem.

That's the info I was looking for!

Thanks,
Dave.

    
    
      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 !!!!!!

    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
    

    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.

    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

    re -.1
    
    Anybody know the answer to this question???
    
    Dave.
    

    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

> 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.

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-

    
>>>>> 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
    

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

>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

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.

>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

>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

    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
        

    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

    >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

    
    If this PC prog is freeware/shareware - any chance of zipping it up and 
     sticking it jon the network ??

    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.

    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

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 

    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 :-(

    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

	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

    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) !

    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

	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

>>>	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.

    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 

    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.
    

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.

    
    
    'The List Price of RENAULT 19 16V 4DRSALOON is #13,657.24' did seem a bit
    steep to me too!!!!!
    
    POL.

    re the last few
    
    Anyone know exactly what is included in the #500 on the road/delivery
    cost?
    
    Mikef

    Full tank of fuel for a start I expect, then the cost of a valet
    plus...

    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

apparently #12,622 for a Rover 214 SLi.  That's the most expensive example
I've seen so far!

Chris.

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

    
    Delivery charge should NOT be included. It is additional to the list
    price of the car.
    
    Richard.

    
    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.

    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

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)

    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.

    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-(

    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
    

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

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

    
    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.

    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
    

    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

    
    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
    

    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!!

    
>>>    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.

    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

	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.

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.

    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

    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

    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!)

    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

    .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?

.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

>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.

re.12:

Do we pay tax on an alarm if it was Digital fitted and not driver requested?

I hope not.

Dave.

    
    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 
    
    

    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   

    
    
>>    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.
    

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.    

    
    
    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 

    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!)

    
    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
    

    
    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

    
    Thanks, must retrieve athat booklet which I remember seeing now you
    mention it.
    
    Richard