Company Cars

in message <[email hidden]>, al Mossah

(') said:

I'm looking for advice on company car tax (and this is not OT, so
please read on)

I work for Jurassic British Industry ltd who offer senior managers
(yes, I
must be one) company cars. Due to some oversight, it has been decreed
that I am now eligible for a rather higher-value machine; a BMW
Mercedes or a
Volvo large-[censored], or something like that. It's a step up from my C5,
anyway (no, not the Sinclair one).

Now, I have 2 problems with this.

1. It'll cost me a shed-load of tax.
2. It's just WRONG. I don't mind the car so much, but it's the "free"
fuel; once you get this you've effectively reduced the marginal cost of
a car journey to zero, removing all incentive to commute by bike and
train, which I enjoy, and strongly believe that more people should do,
etc. etc.

JBI has no "cash-in-lieu" option.

Sack your boss and go and work for a company which hasn't got it's head
up it's own burocracy.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; no eternal reward will forgive us now for wasting the dawn.
;; Jim Morrison

al Mossah said:

I'm looking for advice on company car tax (and this is not OT, so please
read on)

Could you not get a lower value (and more economical) car through the
comapny?

Surely when faced with the option they'd be happy to pay less lease
costs/running costs/fuel costs?

And then you wouldn't pay so much tax or feel so guilty about it.

I have a company car and cycle to work when I can (mainly because I just
enjoy it and it does me good) and you can't use the "it isn't available
for use" argument if you choose to not use it.

I think if the car is not available for use you could possibly have to
prove it (i.e written documentation stating that another employee was
using it on company business for example)

Also if the car is not available for your use then someone else could be
liable for the taxable charge, i.e the company could potentially have to
pay tax for it being used as a pool car (pro rata of course)

Please note that these are not facts, but I think there maybe a hint of
truth in them - I'd speak to the company accountant for clarification if
I were you.

R

al Mossah said:

Now, I have 2 problems with this.

Indeedie.

There are some in the press who like 'green' issues.
Perhaps a bit of publicity might ruffle a few feathers
amongst your colleagues in .. um .. senior management.

--
Nick Kew

(a company director with a company bike and no car:-)

al Mossah said:

. I'm wondering if
between me and JBI we can declare the car "unavailable" for say 100
days in a year.

Simlpe answer - no way. By unavailable they mean not working - because you
choose to ride to work does not make the car unusable.

pk

al Mossah said:

I'm looking for advice on company car tax (and this is not OT, so please
read on)

<snip>

Quoted message said:

The tax rules
state that if the car is unavailable for certain days per year, then the tax
liability is reduced pro-rata. I'm wondering if between me and JBI we can
declare the car "unavailable" for say 100 days in a year. On these days I
would cycle to work, thus saving myself the money, and maintaining my thin
veneer of green-ness. There may be a strong correlation between the
unavailable days and good weather, but why not? Has anyone any experience
of a similar arrangement with the Revenue?

My company car is fitted with a tracker (see
<http://www.minorplanet.co.uk/>, ostensibly (1) to allow easy
differentiation between private and business miles. I get a report
each month showing start and finish point of each journey (turn on of
engine to turn off of engine), and distance covered. I then break this
down to private and business mileage. i then get charged a small
amount per mile of private mileage. With me so far?

A colleague based in the frozen north of the country, working from
home, was succesful in persuading the Revenue that this report could
be used as proof that he only used the car for business mileage. He
had a smaller, cheaper car for private mileage.

(1) The fact that thetrackers were installed shortly after a former
colleague wrapped his repmobile up on a road in the middle of where he
shouldn't have been with no explanation, is of course, co-incidence.

Tim

al Mossah a écrit :

Quoted message said:

Alternatively has anyone had experience of persuading an organisation to
move its company car policy into the 21st Century? I've written a paper on
it, which will probably be dismissed as the ravings of a madman on a bike.

Couldn't you ask for a Prius? (or other hybrid)

That would make your organisation save some money, you paying far less
taxes, and everyone else happier...

--
Marien

Quoted message said:

Couldn't you ask for a Prius? (or other hybrid)

That would make your organisation save some money, you paying far less
taxes, and everyone else happier...

Something like a VW Polo diesel gets much better mpg than a Prius and is
nicer to drive. The Prius is very over rated.

If you're getting a prestige car and want one with good mpg try a BMW
320d or 525d (if you can live with the five's looks). A 320d touring
would let you stick the bike in the back for those more distant and
remote cycling weekends :-)

--
Who needs a life when you've got Unix? :-)
Email: [email hidden], John G.Burns B.Eng, Bonny Scotland
Web : http://www.unixnerd.demon.co.uk - The Ultimate BMW Homepage!
Need Sun or HP Unix kit? http://www.unixnerd.demon.co.uk/unix.html
www.Strathspey.co.uk - Quality Binoculars at a Sensible price

al Mossah wrote:
<snip>

Quoted message said:

I work for Jurassic British Industry ltd who offer senior managers (yes, I
must be one) company cars. Due to some oversight, it has been decreed that
I am now eligible for a rather higher-value machine; a BMW Mercedes or a
Volvo large-[censored], or something like that. It's a step up from my C5, anyway
(no, not the Sinclair one).

1. It'll cost me a shed-load of tax.

Yes, it really will.

Quoted message said:

2. It's just WRONG. I don't mind the car so much, but it's the "free"
fuel; once you get this you've effectively reduced the marginal cost of a
car journey to zero, removing all incentive to commute by bike and train,
which I enjoy, and strongly believe that more people should do, etc. etc.

I'd be very surprised if fuel is free. If you have a fuel card, that's
taxed as well. I think in our company it's about £100 a month, which is
more than I ever spend privately.

Quoted message said:

JBI has no "cash-in-lieu" option.

That really sucks, and is indeed Jurassic.

Pete

"al Mossah" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

2. It's just WRONG. I don't mind the car so much, but it's the "free"
fuel; once you get this you've effectively reduced the marginal cost of a
car journey to zero, removing all incentive to commute by bike and train,
which I enjoy, and strongly believe that more people should do, etc. etc.

The fuel isn't free. You'll pay hefty income tax on it and your company NI
contributions.
So unless you do a high private mileage you could in fact be out of pocket,
your company will be paying for fuel and you pay again in tax. It may be
better if they paid you a little extra in wages (which obviously you'd pay
tax on) and dispensed with the "free" fuel.
A friend has just opted out of the "free" fuel option with his company car
after doing the sums.
--
Pete
http:[email hidden]/Stuff

Quoted message said:

Could you not get a lower value (and more economical) car through the
comapny?

Surely when faced with the option they'd be happy to pay less lease
costs/running costs/fuel costs?

And then you wouldn't pay so much tax or feel so guilty about it.

I'm trying this as well. I'm not sure who will be the most supportive and
flexible; the revenue or JBL.

Quoted message said:

The fuel isn't free. You'll pay hefty income tax on it and your company NI
contributions.

I know, I do this at the moment. My objection is that the tax paid is
independent of mileage, so one might as well drive everywhere. Sends
completely the wrong signals to company car drivers. In fact there's a
motivation to drive as much as possible as fast as possible so as to arrive
at the garage giving the highest rate of loyalty points as empty as
possible.

My ideal is for me just to get the salary and let me pay for my own car and
fuel. Then if I choose to jump on the bike, I gain by not burning fuel.
Thus I will cycle more, thus I will be happier, plus the planet will degrade
slightly more slowly, thus I will feel even happier, etc. By driving more
economically I would gain, not the company.

Oh well, thanks all for the responses.

Tim Hall said:

differentiation between private and business miles. I get a report
each month showing start and finish point of each journey (turn on of
engine to turn off of engine),

Out of interest, does anyone ever check that start of journey n+1 is
teh same location as end of journey n ?

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

Peter B said:

"al Mossah" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

2. It's just WRONG. I don't mind the car so much, but it's the "free"
fuel; once you get this you've effectively reduced the marginal cost of a
car journey to zero, removing all incentive to commute by bike and train,
which I enjoy, and strongly believe that more people should do, etc. etc.

The fuel isn't free. You'll pay hefty income tax on it and your company NI
contributions.
So unless you do a high private mileage you could in fact be out of pocket,
your company will be paying for fuel and you pay again in tax. It may be
better if they paid you a little extra in wages (which obviously you'd pay
tax on) and dispensed with the "free" fuel.
A friend has just opted out of the "free" fuel option with his company car
after doing the sums.

Whereas my old boss, who used to get 11mpg out of her Land Cruiser
Amazon, found it *well* worth it. It's ridiculous that it's taxed at a
flat rate.

Ian Smith said:

Tim Hall said:

differentiation between private and business miles. I get a report
each month showing start and finish point of each journey (turn on of
engine to turn off of engine),

Out of interest, does anyone ever check that start of journey n+1 is
teh same location as end of journey n ?

In normal circumstances,it can't not be. Unless of course the tracker
is malfunctioning. <cough> Recently some journeys to work have started
x miles from home. Either the car got transported by pixies or the
gadget is borked. As this means I pay less private mileage I'm not in
a hurry to let on.

Nobody seems to be checking on it (yet).

Tim

Ningi said:

I'd be very surprised if fuel is free. If you have a fuel card, that's
taxed as well. I think in our company it's about ?100 a month, which is
more than I ever spend privately.

Not really free, but as you're getting charged 100 pounds (or however much)
a month anyway, you might as well drive absolutely everywhere as it costs
you the same as if you only drove to work and back.

I used to have a company car with a fuel card (taxed at a flat rate) so
there was little financial restriction on car journeys. Given the "free"
fuel, people couldn't understand why I went for the most fuel efficient
vehicle that was available to me. I gave up trying to explain as many
people just couldn't get their head round there being other indirect
non-financial costs.

Graeme

"Graeme Dods" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Ningi said:

I'd be very surprised if fuel is free. If you have a fuel card, that's
taxed as well. I think in our company it's about ?100 a month, which is
more than I ever spend privately.

Not really free, but as you're getting charged 100 pounds (or however
much)
a month anyway, you might as well drive absolutely everywhere as it costs
you the same as if you only drove to work and back.

I used to have a company car with a fuel card (taxed at a flat rate) so
there was little financial restriction on car journeys. Given the "free"
fuel, people couldn't understand why I went for the most fuel efficient
vehicle that was available to me. I gave up trying to explain as many
people just couldn't get their head round there being other indirect
non-financial costs.

Graeme

Yes, I have the same difficulty explaining why I would prefer not to have an
ostentatious car and why I care that I get 11 miles per litre out of a big
company car.

"<snip>

Quoted message said:

Whereas my old boss, who used to get 11mpg out of her Land Cruiser Amazon,
found it *well* worth it. It's ridiculous that it's taxed at a flat rate.

</snip>

It's not a flat rate; the rate is X% of £14,400 where X varies according to
the CO2 emissions. So if you choose a Land Cruiser, it will cost a lot more
than a Nissan Micra or equivalent. However, in both cases you pay an amount
INDEPENDENT of actual mileage driven. So the rules DO provide a cash
incentive to choose a more efficient car, but DON'T provide any disincentive
to drive the damn thing. Someone driving 5,000 miles a year will pay the
same as someone driving 50,000 miles in the same vehicle. How crazy is
that?

"al Mossah" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The fuel isn't free. You'll pay hefty income tax on it and your company

NI

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

contributions.

I know, I do this at the moment. My objection is that the tax paid is
independent of mileage, so one might as well drive everywhere. Sends
completely the wrong signals to company car drivers. In fact there's a
motivation to drive as much as possible as fast as possible so as to

arrive

Quoted message said:

at the garage giving the highest rate of loyalty points as empty as
possible.

I see what you're saying. In my friends case he has a reasonably economical
diesel car (company policy) and also drives suffiiciently high enough
business miles to put him off joyriding in his own time.
I'm out of pocket as we used to use his car for toting mountain bikes FOC,
now we have to chip in for fuel and/or alternate vehicles :-(
--
Pete
http:[email hidden]/Stuff

al Mossah said:

"Graeme Dods" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Ningi said:

I'd be very surprised if fuel is free. If you have a fuel card, that's
taxed as well. I think in our company it's about ?100 a month, which is
more than I ever spend privately.

Not really free, but as you're getting charged 100 pounds (or however
much)
a month anyway, you might as well drive absolutely everywhere as it costs
you the same as if you only drove to work and back.

I used to have a company car with a fuel card (taxed at a flat rate) so
there was little financial restriction on car journeys. Given the "free"
fuel, people couldn't understand why I went for the most fuel efficient
vehicle that was available to me. I gave up trying to explain as many
people just couldn't get their head round there being other indirect
non-financial costs.

Graeme

Quoted message said:

Yes, I have the same difficulty explaining why I would prefer not to have an
ostentatious car and why I care that I get 11 miles per litre out of a big
company car.

Don't Aston Martin or someone like that make a bicycle which is
expensive enough to be suitable transport for a man with a big office?

--
Chris Malcolm [email hidden] +44 (0)131 651 3445 DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]