HMRC won't appeal NI decision
Two businesses paid their employees’ car allowances. They said no NI was payable on these to the extent the cars were used for business. HMRC argued the payments were just earnings and so liable to NI. How did the Upper Tribunal (UT) rule?

The Upper Tribunal (UT) simultaneously considered two similar but unconnected disputes: Laing O’Rourke Services Ltd (L) v HMRC and Willmott Dixon Holdings Ltd (W) v HMRC . Both companies paid their employees car allowances which HMRC argued were earnings liable to Class 1 employees’ and employers’ NI. L and W argued that the special rules overrode the normal earnings rule so that the payments should be disregarded for NI purposes.
The UT confirmed that the car allowances were earnings. In respect of the “disregard” rules, it could not find anything that required payments to be reimbursement of motor expenses already incurred. In fact, when the NI rules were created they were intended to mirror the tax rules as far as possible, and they apply the exemption regardless of timing. In reality, motor expenses, apart from fuel, tend to be incurred sporadically, e.g. insurance, servicing, so to limit the tax and NI exemption to expenses already incurred would be illogical and defeat the purpose of the rules. The UT therefore ruled for L and W and against HMRC, which has now confirmed it will not appeal the decision.
By confirming that it won’t appeal, HMRC has opened the door to NI refunds going back six years. It is possible that the rules will be changed to prevent claims for future years though.
Related Topics
-
Was a company buyback of EIS shares tax avoidance?
Two taxpayers used the “purchase of own shares” procedure to extract gains they’d made from enterprise investment scheme (EIS) shares. HMRC said this was unfair tax avoidance, the taxpayers disagreed. What did the Upper Tribunal decide?
-
HMRC’s new compliance check service
HMRC has published a collection of videos and notes to help if you’re picked for a compliance check. Is HMRC’s new service worth a look or is it just official propaganda?
-
Income sharing trouble for separated couple
After a couple separated one spouse received income from letting the property she jointly owned with her estranged spouse. HMRC taxed all the income on her. Was it right to do so or should her spouse have been taxed on half the income?