Hi Toni
As the trip is not wholly and exclusively for business purposes I would suggest perhaps 5/7ths of hotel bills and subsistence, although whole of air fare should be ok as long as they havent incurred any additional cost by staying the extra two days (eg flying back from different airport which involves extra cost).
__________________
Joanne
Winner of Bookkeeper of the Year 2015, 2016 & 2017
Thoughts are my own/not to be regarded as official advice,which should be sought from a suitably qualified Accountant.
You should check out answers with reference to the legal position
You don't say he or she, you say they???? who is else is going on the trip? What is the business reasoning behind attending the the convention? (for everyone who is going). What benefit is it to the business? Is it actually a necessary trip for the purpose of the business?
I'm after more info but I already know that I'm likely to come back with Bentleys Stokes and Lowless v Beeson (1952)
__________________
Shaun
Responses are not meant as a substitute for professional advice. Answers are intended as outline only the advice of a qualified professional with access to all relevant information should be sought before acting on any response given.
Good spot on that little 'they' word. Just remembered something similar cropped up on he before where the hubby wanted to go as bodyguard ( or something like that) to the wife and could they put both through as expenses.
I had one who stayed within the UK but who dragged his wife and two kiddiwinks with him. Interesting conversation about what needed to be disallowed there, especially with receipts for kids colouring books etc
__________________
Joanne
Winner of Bookkeeper of the Year 2015, 2016 & 2017
Thoughts are my own/not to be regarded as official advice,which should be sought from a suitably qualified Accountant.
You should check out answers with reference to the legal position
I think that its one of those conversations that at some stage or another we've all had with our clients.
HMRC's argument comes down to duality of purpose basically even if the trip includes a business element if there is also a holiday side to it then they may view all of the trip as non claimable expenditure due to the duality of purpose.
The case that they quote is Bentleys Stokes and Lowless v Beeson (1952) where it was detmined that the taxpayer took a holiday at the same time as a convention and therefore non of the travel or accomodation was allowable expenditure.
I think that past experience of those sort of conversations makes one hypersensitive to picking up words dropped casually into the conversations such as "we" and "they".
__________________
Shaun
Responses are not meant as a substitute for professional advice. Answers are intended as outline only the advice of a qualified professional with access to all relevant information should be sought before acting on any response given.
Hi all, She is going alone. I misused the word 'they' but totally understand that may make things different.
The convention is 20-24 July inclusive, but she thinks it would be better to go a day or two before. I have asked the client what her business will benefit from the convention and she stated the following:
Keep abreast of latest developments in my field, opportunities to learn new techniques, forge new relationships re teaching opportunities for myself in the future, build up a client base.
Travelling to a convention in another time zone a couple of days early to aclimatise should be considered part of the convention (whats the point paying to attend a convention and spending the first two days asleep!). Other arguements such as travelling on a day other that a Friday or Saturday which are traditionally expensive days to travel would also be legitimate reasoning.
Unless other evidence occurs to make you suspect otherwise I am not seeing this as a holiday (watch out for those expensive Spa / hairdresser / workware purchased on Rodeo Drive (!!!), lol) and I would allow the full expenditure as business travel and be prepared to argue that stance with HMRC.
kindest regards,
Shaun.
__________________
Shaun
Responses are not meant as a substitute for professional advice. Answers are intended as outline only the advice of a qualified professional with access to all relevant information should be sought before acting on any response given.
