Cycling allowance slated

David Martin

An article in the local rag
(<URL:http://www.thecourier.co.uk/output/2004/12/13/newsstory6624019t0.asp>)
indicates some opposition from the local dinosaurs to P+K council
introducing teh milage rate for cycling on council business.

Letter to rag has been sent, indicating that said Mr Stewart is in cloud
cuckoo land if he thinks bikes cost nothing to either buy or maintain.

And asking whether as a Conservative, he really wants to promote the council
spending twice as much on a motoring allowance, rather than an
environmentally and fiscally sensible encouragement of cycling.

...d

JLB

David Martin wrote:
> An article in the local rag
> (<URL:http://www.thecourier.co.uk/output/2004/12/13/newsstory6624019t0.asp>)
> indicates some opposition from the local dinosaurs to P+K council
> introducing teh milage rate for cycling on council business.
>
> Letter to rag has been sent, indicating that said Mr Stewart is in cloud
> cuckoo land if he thinks bikes cost nothing to either buy or maintain.
>
> And asking whether as a Conservative, he really wants to promote the council
> spending twice as much on a motoring allowance, rather than an
> environmentally and fiscally sensible encouragement of cycling.

Well done. No wonder the Tories are nearly extinct in Scotland.

A cycling mileage rate of 20p is pretty much standard in the Civil
Service, so far as I can tell. Considering how bloody stingy most Civil
Service allowances are, this is unusually reasonable. It still amounts
to the cheapest way to move a Civil Servant around, except for walking.
Even walking has a cost, however, if it takes significantly longer to
complete the journey, since the person is still being paid while in transit.

It's the same 20p/mile rate for backbench MPs and government ministers,
but for some reason backbench peers get just 7.4p/mile!

http://www.civilservice.gov.uk/mana...ances/index.asp

--
Joe * If I cannot be free I'll be cheap

Nick Kew

In article <cpjt9c$fmi$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk>,
JLB <JLB@bigbad.demon.co.uk> writes:

> Service, so far as I can tell. Considering how bloody stingy most Civil
> Service allowances are, this is unusually reasonable. It still amounts

Is that true?

In the mid-80s as a young graduate, I worked in a couple of 'body shop'
type software and consultancy houses contracting to government departments.
The clients (civil servants) allowances were around 50% higher than ours;
sometimes much more.

In the mid-90s that differential had increased, as competition favoured
paying peanuts for all contract staff, and private-sector companies who
cared about their employees lost out.

Are you saying that's changed radically in the last few years?

--
Nick Kew

Tony Raven

David Martin wrote:
> An article in the local rag
> (<URL:http://www.thecourier.co.uk/output/2004/12/13/newsstory6624019t0.asp>)
> indicates some opposition from the local dinosaurs to P+K council
> introducing teh milage rate for cycling on council business.
>
> Letter to rag has been sent, indicating that said Mr Stewart is in cloud
> cuckoo land if he thinks bikes cost nothing to either buy or maintain.
>
> And asking whether as a Conservative, he really wants to promote the council
> spending twice as much on a motoring allowance, rather than an
> environmentally and fiscally sensible encouragement of cycling.
>
> ...d
>

He seems to be under the misapprehension though that it can be paid for
cycle from home to work which it can't (at least not tax free) as he
talks about people cycling long distances to work.

Tony

(PS for our US visitors to urc, slated in the UK means condemned as
opposed to the US meaning of scheduled)

MSeries

Tony Raven wrote:

>
> (PS for our US visitors to urc, slated in the UK means condemned as
> opposed to the US meaning of scheduled)


That amused/upset me once. In one of me previous employments the CTO was
Indian, living in the US. He sent an email referring to a meeting where
my design for something was slated. ;-)

[Not Responding]

On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 13:34:03 +0000, Tony Raven <junk@raven-family.com>
wrote:

>He seems to be under the misapprehension though that it can be paid for
>cycle from home to work which it can't (at least not tax free) as he
>talks about people cycling long distances to work.

I think that councillors' travel costs from work to duty are regarded
as expenses in the eyes of the IR. I've never bothered claiming any as
I only live a few miles away so I've not had to test the theory.

But it's all written here:

http://www.inlandrevenue.gov.uk/man...al/EIM65970.htm

I think this covers it:

"114. As elected representatives, councillors are accepted as normally
having two places of work - at the council offices and in their
electoral area. Often councillors need to use their own homes to see
constituents. Where a councillor does use his or her own home to
undertake representative duties on behalf of the council, an allowance
paid for travel between home and the council offices or some other
place on council business is included in the calculation under the
rules described at paragraph 126(viii) below.

115. If it is not necessary for a councillor routinely to see
constituents at home, any allowance paid for travel between home and
the council offices will be taxable in the normal way. The fact that a
councillor chooses to do some work at home - for example reading
council papers or completing correspondence - does not make that home
a distinct place of work for the purpose of claiming tax relief on
travel expenses. However, an allowance paid for travel between home
and any place that is a temporary workplace will also be included in
the calculation at paragraph 126(viii) below."

So, provided you "routinely see constituents at home", you can claim
the mileage untaxed. I think.

Trust me though, you're never going to get rich in this game. When I
last calculated hours/benefits, I found I was doing it for about half
the minimum wage.

JLB

Nick Kew wrote:
> In article <cpjt9c$fmi$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk>,
> JLB <JLB@bigbad.demon.co.uk> writes:
>
>
>>Service, so far as I can tell. Considering how bloody stingy most Civil
>>Service allowances are, this is unusually reasonable. It still amounts
>
>
> Is that true?
>
> In the mid-80s as a young graduate, I worked in a couple of 'body shop'
> type software and consultancy houses contracting to government departments.
> The clients (civil servants) allowances were around 50% higher than ours;
> sometimes much more.
>
> In the mid-90s that differential had increased, as competition favoured
> paying peanuts for all contract staff, and private-sector companies who
> cared about their employees lost out.
>
> Are you saying that's changed radically in the last few years?

My comparison was between full time private company employment (such as
the oil companies and offshore engineering companies all around here)
and the civil service. I'd agree that agency staff are usually given a
hard time. Some of them are officially self-employed anyway, so it's
their business. However, the current arrangements for civil servants are
demonstrably meaner than they were 10 years go. Except the cycling
allowance.
--
Joe * If I cannot be free I'll be cheap

Tony Raven

[Not Responding] wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 13:34:03 +0000, Tony Raven <junk@raven-family.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>>He seems to be under the misapprehension though that it can be paid for
>>cycle from home to work which it can't (at least not tax free) as he
>>talks about people cycling long distances to work.
>
>
> I think that councillors' travel costs from work to duty are regarded
> as expenses in the eyes of the IR. I've never bothered claiming any as
> I only live a few miles away so I've not had to test the theory.
>

Yebbut he wasn't talking about councillors at that point, he was talking
about employees:

"However, Councillor Doig stressed such an allowance already exists for
Perth and Kinross Council’s employees—who receive 25p per mile—and many
cycle long distances to work."

Tony