green travel plan

Peterborough City Council started to implement it, but then pulled out
saying it was too complicated to run. I got this second hand from an
LBS who was helping them set it up. My employer is implementing it (I
expect to collect my new machine in the next two weeks).

"stupot" <***@nospamwowo.com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Does anyone have experience of employers refusing to implement a green
> travel plan (http://www.inlandrevenue.gov.uk/pdfs/ir176.htm)?
>
> What reasons did they give?

Cyclists are saddos and geeks who can't afford cars and the people who make
the rules have company cars and can't be arsed to provide any pro cycling
measures and indeed have anti cycling attitudes. Any car parking facilities
required however seem to have a bottomless pit of money at hand.

I think these overweight middle aged managers want to drag us down to their
level and so want to put us off, despite maintaining a "green" facade.

iakobski wrote:
> Peterborough City Council started to implement it, but then pulled out
> saying it was too complicated to run. I got this second hand from an
> LBS who was helping them set it up. My employer is implementing it (I
> expect to collect my new machine in the next two weeks).

Thanks for the feedback. The info on the inland revenue website seems to
be limited to the link I provided. And that document does not provide
details of how to setup a green travel plan? Does anyone know where to get
the details from?

What is an LBS?

"stupot" <***@nospamwowo.com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> What is an LBS?

Local Bike Shop.

Cheers, helen s

stupot wrote:
> Does anyone have experience of employers refusing to implement a green
> travel plan (http://www.inlandrevenue.gov.uk/pdfs/ir176.htm)?
>
> What reasons did they give?

Which specific elements of the options on the inland revenue document ?

I guess the bike purchase scheme as that's the superficially most
advantageous to a regular cyclist (get a new bike for half-price).

I've known companies imply (never actually state) :
- that they won't implement the bike purchase scheme because that there
isn't any profit for them and it will cost a little to add it to the payroll
systems (even if using a third company like Booost for the running of the
scheme).
- that they unable to provide policing of the recipients of bikes against
the tax rules, and therefore to avoid abuse they do not want to be involved.
The tax rules say a cycle provided under the scheme should be used mainly
for commuting (implying more than 50% use), and also imply that the
recipient should mainly get to work by using the cycle (implying using the
cycle on more than 50% of trips to work).

I'm sure there are other reasons which could be wheeled out.




- Nigel




--
Nigel Cliffe,
Webmaster at http://www.2mm.org.uk/

On 30/3/05 5:45 pm, in article [email protected],
"Nigel Cliffe" <[email protected]> wrote:
> The tax rules say a cycle provided under the scheme should be used mainly
> for commuting (implying more than 50% use), and also imply that the
> recipient should mainly get to work by using the cycle (implying using the
> cycle on more than 50% of trips to work).

I'm not an accountant but I read that as an either/or. You can meet the
regulations either by using the bike predominantly for commuting, or for the
bike to be your main means of commuting.

So, if you commute at least three days a week[1], you can use the bike as
much as you want outside that.

Alternatively, if more than half the trips (mileage would be a tougher one
to poice) were commuting, then that would be fine.

As I said, that is how I read it but I am not professionally qualified to
pass judgement ont he workings of the Inland Revenue.

...d

stupot wrote:
> And that document does not provide
> details of how to setup a green travel plan? Does anyone know where
to get
> the details from?

Your employer will ask the company accountant. The accountant will then
set it up in a similar manner to other salary sacrifice schemes - the
home computer initiative and the childcare voucher scheme. He will seek
guidance from the revenue and customs and excise directly, if he needs
it.

The company will actually make a saving of 12% employer's national
insurance, though they will have to front the cash if the employee is
spreading the payments, which may cost in interest. They might also
save money on car parking.

The company doesn't have to police the mileage. It's very unlikely the
revenue will bother, but if they did it will be the employee who's
liable. If the revenue determine the bike hasn't been used mainly for
commuting the employee will be required to pay tax on a "benefit in
kind".

iakobski wrote:
> stupot wrote:
> Does anyone know where to get the details from?
> Your employer will ask the company accountant. The accountant will then
> set it up in a similar manner to other salary sacrifice schemes - the
> home computer initiative and the childcare voucher scheme. He will seek
> guidance from the revenue and customs and excise directly, if he needs
> it.
Thanks for the info. Sounds like I just have to convince the employer of
the benfits.
Any feebback on tactics that people have succesfully used when trying to
bend an employer to provide a green travel plan?

iakobski wrote:
> The company will actually make a saving of 12% employer's national
> insurance, though they will have to front the cash if the employee is
> spreading the payments, which may cost in interest. They might also
> save money on car parking.
> The company doesn't have to police the mileage. It's very unlikely the
> revenue will bother, but if they did it will be the employee who's
> liable. If the revenue determine the bike hasn't been used mainly for
> commuting the employee will be required to pay tax on a "benefit in
> kind".
The costs dont have to be spread over a time period? The employer did
seem to be worried about the upfront cash they would be forking out. So
if I pay the full cost (minus the tax savings) in the first month then
there is minimal cost to the employer.

Can I find the bike I want from a particular bike shop? Do I then tell
the employer to go and buy it?

On 31/3/05 1:40 pm, in article [email protected],
"stupot" <***@nospamwowo.com> wrote:

> iakobski wrote:
>> The company will actually make a saving of 12% employer's national
>> insurance, though they will have to front the cash if the employee is
>> spreading the payments, which may cost in interest. They might also
>> save money on car parking.
>> The company doesn't have to police the mileage. It's very unlikely the
>> revenue will bother, but if they did it will be the employee who's
>> liable. If the revenue determine the bike hasn't been used mainly for
>> commuting the employee will be required to pay tax on a "benefit in
>> kind".
> The costs dont have to be spread over a time period? The employer did
> seem to be worried about the upfront cash they would be forking out. So
> if I pay the full cost (minus the tax savings) in the first month then
> there is minimal cost to the employer.

The employer is then doing very well as they are saving the employers NI
contribution (which they could pass on to you but probably won't).

> Can I find the bike I want from a particular bike shop? Do I then tell
> the employer to go and buy it?

Even better would be to get the employer to accept an invoice from the shop.
Accessories can also be included if bought at the time so don't fdrget
lights, panniers, racks, air zound, spares etc.

...d

The costs don't have to be spread - unlike the computer scheme which
has an annual limit. So if you can afford it, the easiest thing is to
do it in one go.

I got the shop to produce an invoice made out to the company. The
company will then pay the shop, and I'll go and pick up my bike and
other bits and pieces.

If your employer is really worried about fronting the cash, they can
even wait until they've deducted your salary - but if they're *that*
short of cash, you might want to start looking for another job (wink).
More likely they are worried about what happens if you leave and
haven't paid off the whole amount.

iakobski wrote:
> The costs don't have to be spread - unlike the computer scheme which
> has an annual limit. So if you can afford it, the easiest thing is to
> do it in one go.
Well if the company dont do the green travel plan then that is what will
be happening anyway.

> I got the shop to produce an invoice made out to the company. The
> company will then pay the shop, and I'll go and pick up my bike and
> other bits and pieces.
Good stuff.

> If your employer is really worried about fronting the cash, they can
> even wait until they've deducted your salary - but if they're *that*
> short of cash, you might want to start looking for another job (wink).
> More likely they are worried about what happens if you leave and
> haven't paid off the whole amount.
That was raised as an issue. They said that they will have to put some
insurance in place to cover the outstanding balances.
They also raise the issue of having to offer this to all employees 400+
and are worried about a flood of bike requests.

iakobski wrote:
> stupot wrote:
>
>>And that document does not provide
>>details of how to setup a green travel plan? Does anyone know where
>
> to get
>
>>the details from?
>
>
> Your employer will ask the company accountant. The accountant will then
> set it up in a similar manner to other salary sacrifice schemes - the
> home computer initiative and the childcare voucher scheme. He will seek
> guidance from the revenue and customs and excise directly, if he needs
> it.

the company accountant will then see that they can't make any money from
it, so discard it as a minor fad, and not do anything .... as appears to
be happening in the company I work for.

True enough. They will see it as benefitting very few employees for the
effort to set it up.

You may have more success if you suggest they run the home computer
scheme - which will be used by more employees - then once that's set up
the bike scheme is simple.

iakobski wrote:

> True enough. They will see it as benefitting very few employees for
> the effort to set it up.

And if they're not worried about its benefitting too few employees,
they'll be fretting over being flooded with applications as stupot's
employer apparently is.

--
Dave...