cycle to work scheme implementers

[didds]

being self e,ployed via my own ltd company (and being paid via PAYE of
course) I have the felxinility to use the cycle to work cheme without
any employer hassles etc.

As such, I see that there are varuous "implementers" available to make
the scheme work - e.g www.cyclescheme.co.uk, http://www.cyclesolutions.co.uk
etc

Anyone any expereince of using one of these faciliotators? Any of
them better than others etc?

cheers
ian

 

[Clive George]

"didds" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> being self e,ployed via my own ltd company (and being paid via PAYE of
> course) I have the felxinility to use the cycle to work cheme without
> any employer hassles etc.
>
> As such, I see that there are varuous "implementers" available to make
> the scheme work - e.g www.cyclescheme.co.uk,
> http://www.cyclesolutions.co.uk
> etc
>
> Anyone any expereince of using one of these faciliotators? Any of
> them better than others etc?

If you're your own ltd company there's no gain through using one of these.
No need to do it via salary sacrifice either, or any credit issues. Company
buys the bike, you ride it.
Not doing it via credit means you don't have a 1000 quid limit either.

You'll have to account for the bike as an asset in the company accounts, but
that's not really a great pain.

cheers,
clive

 

[didds]

On 17 Apr, 13:35, "Clive George" <[email protected]> wrote:


> If you're your own ltd company there's no gain through using one of these.
> No need to do it via salary sacrifice either, or any credit issues. Company
> buys the bike, you ride it.
> Not doing it via credit means you don't have a 1000 quid limit either.
>
> You'll have to account for the bike as an asset in the company accounts, but
> that's not really a great pain.


I hadn;t thought ofd that Clive!

So - ltd. co. buys the bike, and it is a company asset.

I - as an employee - get to "hold" the bike (cf company car) which I
use for trips to and from work (or part trips etc) and other bsiness
mileage. I also get to use the bike at weekends and holidays (cf
company car).

Is that right?

No benefit in kind, or equivalent of car tax(or whatever company car
owners get hit by) ?

Presumably once the bike has passed to "depreciation period" (car is
4 years? bike would be... ?) the company could sell the bike ...
probably to me. Yes?

???

cheers for the quick repsonse too!

cheers

ian

 

[Clive George]

"didds" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:4c741c62-895e-4519-9ea1-2c0623b437ee@e39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> On 17 Apr, 13:35, "Clive George" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>> If you're your own ltd company there's no gain through using one of
>> these.
>> No need to do it via salary sacrifice either, or any credit issues.
>> Company
>> buys the bike, you ride it.
>> Not doing it via credit means you don't have a 1000 quid limit either.
>>
>> You'll have to account for the bike as an asset in the company accounts,
>> but
>> that's not really a great pain.
>
>
> I hadn;t thought ofd that Clive!
>
> So - ltd. co. buys the bike, and it is a company asset.

Yup.

> I - as an employee - get to "hold" the bike (cf company car) which I
> use for trips to and from work (or part trips etc) and other bsiness
> mileage. I also get to use the bike at weekends and holidays (cf
> company car).
>
> Is that right?

Yup.

> No benefit in kind, or equivalent of car tax(or whatever company car
> owners get hit by) ?

Yup - no tax on the benefit, so long as it gets used for some work use or
commuting. If it's not used for work use or commuting, you're on dodgier
ground but TBH they're not going to check.
And no equivalent to the company car tax either.

> Presumably once the bike has passed to "depreciation period" (car is
> 4 years? bike would be... ?) the company could sell the bike ...
> probably to me. Yes?

Depreciate however you like. 25% on a reducing balance will match what
you're allowed in corporation tax allowances - it is an asset, not a running
cost. But I guess you have other assets which you already handle.
Sell the bike when you want - TBH I wouldn't bother if the company is
running fine. Remember if your company is VAT registered you'll have to pay
VAT when you buy the bike off them.

Disclaimer - I am not an accountant

cheers,
clive

 

[Nigel Cliffe]

Clive George wrote:
> "didds" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:4c741c62-895e-4519-9ea1-2c0623b437ee@e39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>> On 17 Apr, 13:35, "Clive George" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> If you're your own ltd company there's no gain through using one of
>>> these.
>>> No need to do it via salary sacrifice either, or any credit issues.
>>> Company
>>> buys the bike, you ride it.
>>> Not doing it via credit means you don't have a 1000 quid limit
>>> either. You'll have to account for the bike as an asset in the company
>>> accounts, but
>>> that's not really a great pain.
>>
>>
>> I hadn;t thought ofd that Clive!
>>
>> So - ltd. co. buys the bike, and it is a company asset.


I agree with Clive's answers. Just one extra detail, you must offer the
same deal to all employees. They needn't take it, you just have to offer it.
So, if you have other employees you may want to consider the impact.


Net you are spending the company's money on a bike, claiming back the VAT,
avoiding corporation tax (as its spent before the profit is calculated) and
then lending the assest to an employee (yourself).

Provided you undertake to do the officially outlined share of journeys by
the bike, its tax free (ie. not a Benefit-in-kind). The rules say that you
don't need to keep records of the journeys.
You can no longer claim 20p/mile for bicycle mileage as you are no longer
using a private bicycle for that mileage (instead you are using the company
asset, but I think the company can also pay for maintenance of its
assets...). I doubt the bike mileage claim tax benefit could
counter-balance the advantages for a new purchase.



- Nigel (co-owner/director of small limited company)



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

 

[naked_draughtsman]

On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 05:50:40 -0700, didds wrote:
> Presumably once the bike has passed to "depreciation period" (car is
> 4 years? bike would be... ?) the company could sell the bike ...
> probably to me. Yes?

Yes.

With the regular bike to work scheme the employee hires the bike from the
company (paid for with salary sacrifice) then after the hire period ends
(which coincidentally is when the sum of the hire charges equals the cost
of the bike to the employer) the employer needs to dispose of the asset.

The employee is usually required to pay an amount for the bike
which is probably something equivalent to the resale value of the second
hand item (e.g. £10). This can't be advertised at the start of the hire
agreement (because then it becomes a hire purchase agreement?). The fee
may also be used to prove that the company has sold the item to someone
rather than the company disposing of waste to an unlicensed person.

This info is what I've gathered from the discussions we've had about it at
work. The details seem really picky but in a way it is a government
endorsed tax fiddle so it is to be expected!

peter

 

[Rob Oldfield]

"Clive George" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:Ss2dnergT9tm3prVnZ2dnUVZ8qijnZ2d@plusnet...
> "didds" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> being self e,ployed via my own ltd company (and being paid via PAYE of
>> course) I have the felxinility to use the cycle to work cheme without
>> any employer hassles etc.
>>
>> As such, I see that there are varuous "implementers" available to make
>> the scheme work - e.g www.cyclescheme.co.uk,
>> http://www.cyclesolutions.co.uk
>> etc
>>
>> Anyone any expereince of using one of these faciliotators? Any of
>> them better than others etc?

I have no idea of their relative merits, but cyclescheme is run by a couple
of guys who used to run my LBS. They're good blokes.

 

[OG]

"Clive George" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:dfadnSO7FLBTyZrVnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@plusnet...
> "didds" <[email protected]> wrote in message

>
>> No benefit in kind, or equivalent of car tax(or whatever company car
>> owners get hit by) ?
>
> Yup - no tax on the benefit, so long as it gets used for some work use or
> commuting. If it's not used for work use or commuting, you're on dodgier
> ground but TBH they're not going to check.

I winced when I read that 'but TBH they're not going to check'

Of course it's a myth to think that POBs are all honest, legal, decent and
truthful (with good teeth and the ability to sit down and effortlessly
entertain at the piano), but I don't like to think that we would, in any
way, think that that is 'acceptable' - after all, if that is 'OK', why not
any form of tax evasion you think you might get away with?

 

[Clive George]

"OG" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Clive George" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:dfadnSO7FLBTyZrVnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@plusnet...
>> "didds" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
>>
>>> No benefit in kind, or equivalent of car tax(or whatever company car
>>> owners get hit by) ?
>>
>> Yup - no tax on the benefit, so long as it gets used for some work use or
>> commuting. If it's not used for work use or commuting, you're on dodgier
>> ground but TBH they're not going to check.
>
> I winced when I read that 'but TBH they're not going to check'
>
> Of course it's a myth to think that POBs are all honest, legal, decent and
> truthful (with good teeth and the ability to sit down and effortlessly
> entertain at the piano), but I don't like to think that we would, in any
> way, think that that is 'acceptable' - after all, if that is 'OK', why
> not any form of tax evasion you think you might get away with?

Wince away. I'm in the position where I could have probably tried it, but
didn't. I'm moderately sure that a (ex?) contributor to this NG got a
full-sus MTB on the scheme, which I'm betting doesn't get used for
business/commuting. I also know somebody who did it fully legitimately after
my advice - so that covers all the scenarios.

didds asked about the rules. I've told him the rules. I've told him what the
practice is too. This is providing information, not useless handwringing.

clive

 

[OG]

"Clive George" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:j_2dnRog84YQd5rVnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@plusnet...
> "OG" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> "Clive George" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:dfadnSO7FLBTyZrVnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@plusnet...
>>> "didds" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>
>>>
>>>> No benefit in kind, or equivalent of car tax(or whatever company car
>>>> owners get hit by) ?
>>>
>>> Yup - no tax on the benefit, so long as it gets used for some work use
>>> or commuting. If it's not used for work use or commuting, you're on
>>> dodgier ground but TBH they're not going to check.
>>
>> I winced when I read that 'but TBH they're not going to check'
>>
>> Of course it's a myth to think that POBs are all honest, legal, decent
>> and truthful (with good teeth and the ability to sit down and
>> effortlessly entertain at the piano), but I don't like to think that we
>> would, in any way, think that that is 'acceptable' - after all, if that
>> is 'OK', why not any form of tax evasion you think you might get away
>> with?
>
> Wince away. I'm in the position where I could have probably tried it, but
> didn't. I'm moderately sure that a (ex?) contributor to this NG got a
> full-sus MTB on the scheme, which I'm betting doesn't get used for
> business/commuting. I also know somebody who did it fully legitimately
> after my advice - so that covers all the scenarios.
>
> didds asked about the rules. I've told him the rules. I've told him what
> the practice is too. This is providing information, not useless
> handwringing.

OK, maybe you have an antipathy to 'useless handwringing'; however, I don't
think it's OK to promote (or condone) a culture of attempting to get away
with 'dodgy grounds' behaviour.

 

[didds]

Thanks to all for their feedback. I've spoken to my accountant also
now and she confirms everything Clive (amongst others have said). FTR
I would be using it for commuting to clients!!!

FYI I have worked for government departments that have had mountain
bikes and safety gear provided for staff to use for business purposes
ie owned by the department, noit individuals, and I can categorically
state that the vast majority of use of those bicycles (99.9% at
least!) was lunchtime recreation with very, very little use for
tavelling on business purposes. You may read into that what you
wish...



didds

 

[naked_draughtsman]

On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 01:50:40 -0700, didds wrote:

> I can categorically
> state that the vast majority of use of those bicycles (99.9% at
> least!) was lunchtime recreation with very, very little use for
> tavelling on business purposes. You may read into that what you
> wish...

That will be the departments' new health initatives!

If it's encouraging people to get half an hour of exercise a day that's
good.
If it's encouraging people to try out cycling whi might not have
considered it before then that's also good (at least if they don't like it
they can say they've tried).

Healthy employees is better for business as it should improve productivity
and reduce the amount of time people have off due to sickness (maybe).

peter