Company Loans for Bicycles

In message <[email hidden]>, Paul Saunders
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

If a bike is used mainly for commuting to and from work you can get a tax concession on it. My
company limits it to £500, but my financial director (who is a keen cyclist) says that there is no
limit. The company buys the bike and you then pay them back over a given period (3 months in our
case) from your gross pay, thereby saving the tax.

Can someone point me towards an official looking document that describes this scheme? I can find
loads of references that a company is allowed to lend cycles to employees for them to travel into
work, provide free cycle parking and even occasional cyclists' breakfasts but nothing that describes
this 'purchase' scheme.

Thanks.
--
Michael MacClancy

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

Quoted message said:

Currently my company offers loans for employees to buy season tickets for public transport or
cars. My wish is to have them expand the scheme to include bicycles..as anyone out there have
experience of helping a company set up such a scheme or running a scheme. Looking at previous
posts it also looks like there is a tax allowance allowed for bicycle purchases this way, is
this right?

The company is fairly cycle friendly with covered cycle racks and showers provided were possible
at all sites, so I can't see it being too much of a problem.

Also we have a large base in London, would we be benefit from having corp membership of an org'
such as the LCN. We do have lots of other sites across the UK..so is there a more suitable org who
could provide benefits that the LCN provides for members

Look forward to all your great advice

Nigel

PS the scheme wouldn't benefit me as I have just bought a lovely shiny new Condor Itali
today...only a week till I pick it up!!!!!

Bloody good idea, i may try that at work and see what happens, i folding would be cool as i can't
see them funding a titanium Litespeed somehow.

Michael MacClancy said:

In message <[email hidden]>, Paul Saunders
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

If a bike is used mainly for commuting to and from work you can get a tax concession on it. My
company limits it to £500, but my financial director (who is a keen cyclist) says that there is no
limit. The company buys the bike and you then pay them back over a given period (3 months in our
case) from your gross pay, thereby saving the tax.

Can someone point me towards an official looking document that describes this scheme? I can find
loads of references that a company is allowed to lend cycles to employees for them to travel into
work, provide free cycle parking and even occasional cyclists' breakfasts but nothing that
describes this 'purchase' scheme.

And can someone tell me if it can be applied retrospectively (only a couple of months in my case)

Regards,

Tim.

--
God said, "div D = rho, div B = 0, curl E = - @B/@t, curl H = J + @D/@t," and there was light.

tjw.hn.orgtjw.hn.orgOpen ↗ locofungus.btinternet.co.uklocofungus.btinternet.co.ukOpen ↗

"Paul Saunders" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

If a bike is used mainly for commuting to and from work you can get a tax concession on it. My
company limits it to £500, but my financial director (who is a keen cyclist) says that there is no
limit. The company buys the bike and you then pay them back over a given period (3 months in our
case) from your gross pay, thereby saving the tax.

So you could potentially buy a £2k carbon fibre racer and only have £1200 taken out of your net pay,
with HM Govt footing the other £800?

There *must* be a catch somewhere!!

"Michael MacClancy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In message <[email hidden]>, Paul Saunders
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

If a bike is used mainly for commuting to and from work you can get a tax concession on it. My
company limits it to £500, but my financial director (who is a keen cyclist) says that there is
no limit. The company buys the bike and you then pay them back over a given period (3 months in
our case) from your gross pay, thereby saving the tax.

Can someone point me towards an official looking document that describes this scheme? I can find
loads of references that a company is allowed to lend cycles to employees for them to travel into
work, provide free cycle parking and even occasional cyclists' breakfasts but nothing that
describes this 'purchase' scheme.

You don't get much more official than HM Treasury:

General Leaflet: inlandrevenue.gov.ukir176.pdfOpen ↗

Top level website: inlandrevenue.gov.ukgreen travel.htmOpen ↗

What is actually in the finance act (aka. budget):
hmso.gov.uk30001 y.htmOpen ↗

All of which seems to confirm the story - company can purchase the bike for you, provided you
commute on it, and you pay no benefit in kind. There is no mention of an upper limit in value.

Note Condition (A) in the third URL above about "not transferring the property", I read this to mean
the bike has to be property of the employer.

The dodge which Paul Saunders describes appears to involve reducing your pre-tax gross salary by the
price of the bike (ie. sacrificing salary for the benefit of a bicycle). Your take-home is reduced
by considerably less than the price of the bike, but you do also suffer a marginal cut in NI
contributions which might affect your benefit/pension entitlements (if you care about this, take
advice). This is OK provided the bike is property of the employer; the reduction in gross salary is
a private matter, varying your contract.

In order for you to own the bike, the employer needs to sell it to you in such a way that you don't
pay twice: After some time - say a year or two - , the company declares the bike "written off" and
sells it to you for a peppercorn amount of scrap value, reduced by the costs the employer might
otherwise incur trying to sell it (shall we say 5% of its new price?).

(My employers, a very big UK plc, are doing a similar dodge "lending" staff computers for home use
with a salary sacrifice deduction, then allowing them to be bought after three years for less-than
5% of their new price).

NC (not an accountant or tax lawyer, so take proper advice, just my personal reading of the rules).

In "]news:[email hidden], Adrian Boliston <[email hidden]> typed:

Quoted message said:

So you could potentially buy a £2k carbon fibre racer and only have £1200 taken out of your net
pay, with HM Govt footing the other £800?

There *must* be a catch somewhere!!

There is - it has to be used mainly for business purposes including commuting and be available
for use by other employees. Under those circumstances the bicycle does not become a taxable
benefit in kind.

As I understand it the company can *loan* you a bike without it becoming a benefit in kind. However
they would need to buy a bike and what I think is happening here is the company is saying that I
won't pay for it but if you agree to take a reduction in taxable pay I will use the money I save to
buy a bike which I will make available to you. Don't forget that most companies will save tax and NI
plus can reclaim VAT and capital allowances

The details are at inlandrevenue.gov.ukir176.pdfOpen ↗

Tony

--
raven-family.comraven-family.comOpen ↗

"All truth goes through three steps: First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed.
Finally, it is accepted as self-evident." Arthur Schopenhauer

In message <[email hidden]>, Tony Raven <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

In "]news:[email hidden], Adrian Boliston <[email hidden]> typed:

Quoted message said:

So you could potentially buy a £2k carbon fibre racer and only have £1200 taken out of your net
pay, with HM Govt footing the other £800?

There *must* be a catch somewhere!!

There is - it has to be used mainly for business purposes including commuting and be available
for use by other employees. Under those circumstances the bicycle does not become a taxable
benefit in kind.

As I understand it the company can *loan* you a bike without it becoming a benefit in kind. However
they would need to buy a bike and what I think is happening here is the company is saying that I
won't pay for it but if you agree to take a reduction in taxable pay I will use the money I save to
buy a bike which I will make available to you. Don't forget that most companies will save tax and
NI plus can reclaim VAT and capital allowances

The details are at inlandrevenue.gov.ukir176.pdfOpen ↗

Tony

Thanks to everyone for the information. It confirms my suspicion that companies seem to be
misleading people about this scheme. The fact is that you can have use of a bike owned by the
company and not pay any tax on the benefit. If the company is asking the employee for money towards
the cost of the bike this does not mean that the employee owns the bike. At some stage the company
will need to transfer ownership to the employee and some sort of further payment will probably be
necessary. The company's ability to write down the value of the bike is going to be limited by tax
rules so it would appear to be unrealistic to expect to buy the bike for a pittance after a short
period. If the Inland Revenue's attention is drawn to the fact that companies and employees are
using this tax concession to allow employees to buy bikes cheaply then you can expect them to clamp
down on the practice. If I was an employee considering this scheme I would be very careful. Anyway,
it's better to persuade the company to pay for the bike and lend it to you. That's the spirit of the
law, the company has the ownership risk and pays for insurance and maintenance and you get to use a
bike for nothing. OK, when you change employer you lose the bike but that's what happens with
company cars anyway.
--
Michael MacClancy

[email hidden] (NIGEL) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Currently my company offers loans for employees to buy season tickets for public transport or
cars. My wish is to have them expand the scheme to include bicycles..as anyone out there have
experience of helping a company set up such a scheme or running a scheme. Looking at previous
posts it also looks like there is a tax allowance allowed for bicycle purchases this way, is
this right?

The company is fairly cycle friendly with covered cycle racks and showers provided were possible
at all sites, so I can't see it being too much of a problem.

Also we have a large base in London, would we be benefit from having corp membership of an org'
such as the LCN. We do have lots of other sites across the UK..so is there a more suitable org who
could provide benefits that the LCN provides for members

Look forward to all your great advice

Nigel

Nigel, my company operates such a scheme. We can get an interest free loan to the value of £500 to
buy "a bicycle and accessories" and pay it back over 10 months. It operates in exactly the same way
as a loan to buy a car, or season ticket, or car-parking permit - the company also offers these at
interest-free spread over 10 months. The money is deducted by payroll and appears in the
"deductions" columm of my payslip.

This way it's nice and simple. There are no tax complications (AFAIA). I assume that these figures
are plucked out of thin air with a view to ensure that the loan will be repaid - I've just
remembered, the monthly repayments cannot be more than 10% of your monthly pay. All the usual
clawback clauses are inserted.

It's not very well publicised. And there was once a rumour that our LBS gave 10% off the price to
employees, but I haven't heard anything else about this. Now, if only I could persuade my LBS to
stock some high end kit :-)

HTH SteveP

In message <[email hidden]>, Richard Goodman
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

The dodge which Paul Saunders describes appears to involve reducing your pre-tax gross salary by
the price of the bike (ie. sacrificing salary for the benefit of a bicycle). Your take-home is
reduced by considerably less than the price of the bike, but you do also suffer a marginal cut in
NI contributions which might affect your benefit/pension entitlements (if you care about this,
take advice). This is OK provided the bike is property of the employer; the reduction in gross
salary is a private matter,

varying

Quoted message said:

your contract.

In order for you to own the bike, the employer needs to sell it to you in such a way that you
don't pay twice: After some time - say a year or two -

,

Quoted message said:

the company declares the bike "written off" and sells it to you for a peppercorn amount of scrap
value, reduced by the costs the employer might otherwise incur trying to sell it (shall we say 5%
of its new price?).

That sounds like an excellent summary. So that means if I normally gross, say £27,900 pa, and get
my employer to buy a bike costing £900 for my use and take it out of my salary as a private
arrangement, my gross for tax/NI purposes, becomes £27,000 in the year of purchase? That would mean
netting about £600 less, saving a third of the cost of the bike. If I then buy it off my employer
for 5% of its new value after a year, that's another £45 so I'll have saved around £250 on the
normal new price? My employer also gains a bit because they'll pay slightly less in employer's
NICs, since my taxable salary is less, and they get to sell a bike they never paid for in the first
place for a nominal sum?

I'm not a tax expert but I do run a business and I think that the picture is a bit more complicated
than the interpretation given above.

The company does much better than explained above because it probably doesn't pay VAT on the bike.
It gains as soon as you part with your £900 and again when you pay your £45. The transactions you
describe result in (approximate figures) a gain for you of about £255 and a gain for the company of
about £172 balanced by losses for the Inland Revenue of £300 and Customs & Excise of £127. (This
neglects NI and Corporation Tax).

I suspect that both the Inland Revenue and Customs & Excise will spot this trick and prevent the
employer writing off 95% of the bike's value in a single year or else find a way of taxing
someone (company or employee) for the benefit. As with company cars the sale to the employee
should take place at a market price. I don't think bikes worth having depreciate as quickly as
computers, do they?

As I've written before, the idea behind the 'official' scheme is that the company should lend the
bike free of charge and tax. If you fulfil the requirements of the scheme vis-à-vis commuting then
why not persuade them to operate the scheme properly or at least in such a way that employer and
employee share the costs more fairly?

--
Michael MacClancy

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

Quoted message said:

The dodge which Paul Saunders describes appears to involve reducing your pre-tax gross salary by
the price of the bike (ie. sacrificing salary for the benefit of a bicycle). Your take-home is
reduced by considerably less than the price of the bike, but you do also suffer a marginal cut in
NI contributions which might affect your benefit/pension entitlements (if you care about this,
take advice). This is OK provided the bike is property of the employer; the reduction in gross
salary is a private matter,

varying

Quoted message said:

your contract.

In order for you to own the bike, the employer needs to sell it to you in such a way that you
don't pay twice: After some time - say a year or two -

,

Quoted message said:

the company declares the bike "written off" and sells it to you for a peppercorn amount of scrap
value, reduced by the costs the employer might otherwise incur trying to sell it (shall we say 5%
of its new price?).

That sounds like an excellent summary. So that means if I normally gross, say £27,900 pa, and get my
employer to buy a bike costing £900 for my use and take it out of my salary as a private
arrangement, my gross for tax/NI purposes, becomes £27,000 in the year of purchase? That would mean
netting about £600 less, saving a third of the cost of the bike. If I then buy it off my employer
for 5% of its new value after a year, that's another £45 so I'll have saved around £250 on the
normal new price? My employer also gains a bit because they'll pay slightly less in employer's NICs,
since my taxable salary is less, and they get to sell a bike they never paid for in the first place
for a nominal sum?

Rich

Rich

"Michael MacClancy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

..

Quoted message said:

If the Inland Revenue's attention is drawn to the fact that companies and employees are using
this tax concession to allow employees to buy bikes cheaply then you can expect them to clamp
down on the practice. If I was an employee considering this scheme I would be very careful.
Anyway, it's better to persuade the company to pay for the bike and lend it to you. That's the
spirit of the law, the company has the ownership risk and

..

I suspect if they stop it at all it won't be because of this but because of political lack of will
to continue pursuing tax concessions on 'green travel'. As to being better to persuade the company
to pay for the bike and lend it, I absolutely agree this would be a better option but it would be
an unviable option in many cases. My company might be persuaded to do something that doesn't
actually cost them anything and might in fact give them some small gain, but there is no way they
would provide even a single company bike at their own expense (and in fact the policy requires the
scheme to be open to all employees)! I think if the IR really wants to promote green travel through
the policy, they would have to accept the use of such a 'dodge' to make anything be acheived out of
it at all.

Rich

"Michael MacClancy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In message <[email hidden]>, Richard Goodman
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

The dodge which Paul Saunders describes appears to involve reducing

your

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

pre-tax gross salary by the price of the bike (ie. sacrificing salary

for

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the benefit of a bicycle). Your take-home is reduced by considerably

less

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

than the price of the bike, but you do also suffer a marginal cut in NI contributions which
might affect your benefit/pension entitlements (if

you

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

care about this, take advice). This is OK provided the bike is

property

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

of the employer; the reduction in gross salary is a private matter,

varying

Quoted message said:

your contract.

In order for you to own the bike, the employer needs to sell it to you

in

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

such a way that you don't pay twice: After some time - say a year or

two -

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

,

Quoted message said:

the company declares the bike "written off" and sells it to you for a peppercorn amount of
scrap value, reduced by the costs the employer

might

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

otherwise incur trying to sell it (shall we say 5% of its new price?).

That sounds like an excellent summary. So that means if I normally

gross,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

say £27,900 pa, and get my employer to buy a bike costing £900 for my use and take it out of my
salary as a private arrangement, my gross for

tax/NI

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

purposes, becomes £27,000 in the year of purchase? That would mean

netting

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

about £600 less, saving a third of the cost of the bike. If I then buy

it

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

off my employer for 5% of its new value after a year, that's another £45

so

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I'll have saved around £250 on the normal new price? My employer also

gains

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

a bit because they'll pay slightly less in employer's NICs, since my

taxable

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

salary is less, and they get to sell a bike they never paid for in the

first

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

place for a nominal sum?

I'm not a tax expert but I do run a business and I think that the picture is a bit more
complicated than the interpretation given above.

The company does much better than explained above because it probably doesn't pay VAT on the bike.
It gains as soon as you part with your £900 and again when you pay your £45. The transactions you
describe result in (approximate figures) a gain for you of about £255 and a gain for the company
of about £172 balanced by losses for the Inland Revenue of £300 and Customs & Excise of £127.
(This neglects NI and Corporation Tax).

Ah, but personally I work for a charity that isn't registered for VAT and so can't reclaim it, and
pays no corporation tax.

Quoted message said:

I suspect that both the Inland Revenue and Customs & Excise will spot this trick and prevent the
employer writing off 95% of the bike's value in a single year or else find a way of taxing
someone (company or employee) for the benefit. As with company cars the sale to the employee
should take place at a market price. I don't think bikes worth having depreciate as quickly as
computers, do they?

It probably is true that one year is a bit soon to write a bike off, and if it is sold before it can
be written off I suspect you are right and it would need to be at market value, but it could also
depend on the initial value of the bike. Below a certain amount, it wouldn't even be capitalised in
the accounts (although a £900 bike certainly would). Leaving the bike on permanent loan is of course
an option..

Quoted message said:

As I've written before, the idea behind the 'official' scheme is that the company should lend the
bike free of charge and tax. If you fulfil the requirements of the scheme vis-à-vis commuting then
why not persuade them to operate the scheme properly or at least in such a way that employer and
employee share the costs more fairly?

Because the employer might not be able or willing to do it any other way, and sharing the cost in
the way you suggest would mean the scheme would be of no effect, since no advantage could be taken
of it in that situation.

Rich

In message <[email hidden]>, Richard Goodman
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Because the employer might not be able or willing to do it any other way, and sharing the cost in
the way you suggest would mean the scheme would be of no effect, since no advantage could be taken
of it in that situation.

Oh, I don't know. If you could use a £900 bike at the cost of a £5/week deduction from gross salary
(£3.50 net) that might not be bad deal?
--
Michael MacClancy

"Paul Saunders" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

If a bike is used mainly for commuting to and from work you can get a tax concession on it. My
company limits it to £500, but my financial director (who is a keen cyclist) says that there is
no limit.

I suspect the reason for the limit is the company's accountancy policies. Below a certain value,
items appear in accounts simply as 'expenditure' incurred in the year the money is spent. Above a
certain value assets have to be capitalised in the accounts meaning that they appear in the
company's books in a different way, spread over a number of years as they depreciate in value. It
makes for more troublesome accountancy and perhaps problems and yet more accountancy work in
allowing title to pass to the employee at some point (or simply 'forgetting' about it). It might
also be that since the idea of the scheme is to facilitate cycle commuting, which hardly requires
anything all that exotic, a cheaper bike might be seen as more ostensibly suggesting it was acquired
for the purposes of the scheme - and avoid any auditor scrutiny in that regard.

Rich

Yes you could spend £1200 on a bike and you'd still get the tax relief on
it. It is supposed to be used mainly for commuting (but who's going to police that)? It's YOUR bike,
You've paid for it so it doesn't have to be available to anyone else. Also, there's nothing
'dodgy' about it. It's a government incentive (Yes, difficult to believe I know) to get people
out of their cars. Our company pays for the bike and you then pay them back out of your gross
salary so this part of your salary is immune to tax. I don't want to sound rude, but it really
is as straight forward as that. (Well, it is in my companies case) "NIGEL" <[email hidden]>
wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Currently my company offers loans for employees to buy season tickets for public transport or
cars. My wish is to have them expand the scheme to include bicycles..as anyone out there have
experience of helping a company set up such a scheme or running a scheme. Looking at previous
posts it also looks like there is a tax allowance allowed for bicycle purchases this way, is
this right?

The company is fairly cycle friendly with covered cycle racks and showers provided were possible
at all sites, so I can't see it being too much of a problem.

Also we have a large base in London, would we be benefit from having corp membership of an org'
such as the LCN. We do have lots of other sites across the UK..so is there a more suitable org who
could provide benefits that the LCN provides for members

Look forward to all your great advice

Nigel

PS the scheme wouldn't benefit me as I have just bought a lovely shiny new Condor Itali
today...only a week till I pick it up!!!!!

In "]news:[email hidden], Michael MacClancy
<[email hidden]> typed:

Quoted message said:

The company does much better than explained above because it probably doesn't pay VAT on the bike.
It gains as soon as you part with your £900 and again when you pay your £45. The transactions you
describe result in (approximate figures) a gain for you of about £255 and a gain for the company
of about £172 balanced by losses for the Inland Revenue of £300 and Customs & Excise of £127.
(This neglects NI and Corporation Tax).

The corporation tax is not insignificant. The bike comes within capital allowances for plant
and machinery

Tony

--
raven-family.comraven-family.comOpen ↗

"All truth goes through three steps: First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed.
Finally, it is accepted as self-evident." Arthur Schopenhauer

In "]news:[email hidden],

Quoted message said:

It probably is true that one year is a bit soon to write a bike off, and if it is sold before it
can be written off I suspect you are right and it would need to be at market value, but it could
also depend on the initial value of the bike. Below a certain amount, it wouldn't even be
capitalised in the accounts (although a £900 bike certainly would). Leaving the bike on permanent
loan is of course an option..

Writing it down over a year doesn't help. The revenue is only interested in whether it was sold
below market value. If it was they will class it as a benefit in kind and tax you on the difference
between market value and what you paid. The written down value in the balance sheet is irrelevant.

Tony

--
raven-family.comraven-family.comOpen ↗

"All truth goes through three steps: First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed.
Finally, it is accepted as self-evident." Arthur Schopenhauer

Adrian Boliston said:

"Paul Saunders" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

If a bike is used mainly for commuting to and from work you can get a tax concession on it. My
company limits it to £500, but my financial director (who is a keen cyclist) says that there is
no limit. The company buys the bike and you then pay them back over a given period (3 months in
our case) from your gross pay, thereby saving the tax.

So you could potentially buy a £2k carbon fibre racer and only have £1200 taken out of your net
pay, with HM Govt footing the other £800?

There *must* be a catch somewhere!!

You have to lend it to Gordon Brown every third weekend.

Tim
--

fast and gripping, non pompous, glossy and credible.

"Tony Raven" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In "]news:[email hidden], Writing it down over a year doesn't help. The revenue
is only interested

in

Quoted message said:

whether it was sold below market value. If it was they will class it as a benefit in kind and tax
you on the difference between market value and

what

Quoted message said:

you paid. The written down value in the balance sheet is irrelevant.

Basically true, although it seems it is a bit more complicated than that. The provisions for
calculating the taxable value of an assest transferred to an employee are contained, so far as I can
see, in Chapter 10 of Part 3 of the same Act governing the exemption for cycles:
hmso.gov.uk30001 t.htmOpen ↗

The cost of the benefit of a used/depreciated asset is the higher of the current market value and
the initial market value less the costs and value of providing the asset as a benefit before the
transfer... Which probably does comes down to the market value in the case of a bike, and as you say
tax would be payable on the difference between the cost of the benefit and what you actually paid.

However,
- It seems some companies are operating these schemes without problem or hangup about it, so they
seem to be finding a way of operating it to everyone's satisfaction.
- Even the term 'market value' has some scope for flexibility - it's the price "expected" to fetch
sold on the 'open market' - presumably an auction is an open market where "expectations" can be
quite low.
- As a matter of practical reality, items of office equipment and materials probably quite often end
up in employee hands when no longer required by the company, with the company's consent, and noone
is bothered about it. Such items have usually long since disappeared from the balance sheet or
asset register, or never appeared on it in the first place, the value being too low. It saves
aggravation and waste of time (money) dealing with something that is considered to be scrap. At
least, that's certainly the case in my office. None of this gets shown on the accounts as a
taxable benefit or otherwise. Unless a bike was particularly expensive, it mightn't take that long
for it to disappear in the same way.

Rich