Can my wife claim the cost of training courses against PAYE?
Discussion
Evening all,
My wife recently qualified as a Personal Trainer, and is also looking at gaining a couple of other qualifications to teach Pilates and the like.
If she was self employed, I assume that the course fees for gaining the qualifications could be claimed against tax, but she's employed by a local leisure centre, and they don't pay for courses.
As such, is there any way she can claim the cost of the courses against PAYE?
My wife recently qualified as a Personal Trainer, and is also looking at gaining a couple of other qualifications to teach Pilates and the like.
If she was self employed, I assume that the course fees for gaining the qualifications could be claimed against tax, but she's employed by a local leisure centre, and they don't pay for courses.
As such, is there any way she can claim the cost of the courses against PAYE?
Eric Mc said:
For a cost to be legitimately offset against EMPLOYMENT income for tax purposes, it must have been incurred "wholly, exclusively and NECCESSARILLY in the performance of the employment duties".
I can't imagine anyone (even HMRC!) would argue with personal training and pilates qualifications being gained wholly and exclusively for the performance of employment duties.As for the "neccessarily", she had to be REPS3 qualified (the personal trainer qualification) before she could even apply for the job she currently does, and I'm pretty sure it is also a mandatory requirement for her public liability insurance.
Based on the above, am I right in thinking she would qualify?
Kermit power said:
I can't imagine anyone (even HMRC!) would argue with personal training and pilates qualifications being gained wholly and exclusively for the performance of employment duties.
As for the "neccessarily", she had to be REPS3 qualified (the personal trainer qualification) before she could even apply for the job she currently does, and I'm pretty sure it is also a mandatory requirement for her public liability insurance.
Based on the above, am I right in thinking she would qualify?
Yes, it is possible to make a standalone claim for tax relief if not reimbursed by an employer. I don't have legislation / HMRC guidance in front of me at the moment, but it's definitely in there. There are, of course, conditions which I cannot remember.As for the "neccessarily", she had to be REPS3 qualified (the personal trainer qualification) before she could even apply for the job she currently does, and I'm pretty sure it is also a mandatory requirement for her public liability insurance.
Based on the above, am I right in thinking she would qualify?
It sounds like the expense CAN be claimed.
I'm a qualified accountant and when I was an employee I used to claim my annual professional subscriptions on the basis that being qualified was one of the criteria of being employed. If I had let my qualification lapse, I would have been let go.
The test for allowability of expenses incurred by employees is tighter than the test for those who want to offset costs in business. The extra test is the "necessary" factor. The cost MUST be incurred in order for the employee to be able to carry on whatever employment they have.
I'm a qualified accountant and when I was an employee I used to claim my annual professional subscriptions on the basis that being qualified was one of the criteria of being employed. If I had let my qualification lapse, I would have been let go.
The test for allowability of expenses incurred by employees is tighter than the test for those who want to offset costs in business. The extra test is the "necessary" factor. The cost MUST be incurred in order for the employee to be able to carry on whatever employment they have.
http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/eimanual/EIM32525.h...
This is the HMRC manual (internal guidance, but freely published) explaining the basis for allowing a claim for self-funded training expenses.
This is the HMRC manual (internal guidance, but freely published) explaining the basis for allowing a claim for self-funded training expenses.
schmunk said:
Not exactly true - see Silva v Charnock
Legal cases will often throw up anomalies.Although in this case it seems the claim was being made by the EMPLOYER (NOT the employee). And the case is described as "exceptional" - although HMRC would say that).
Per HMRC -
Silva v Charnock (SpC332)
Where such an amount is paid, the employers and/or the employee may contend that the Special Commissioner’s decision in Silva v Charnock (SpC332) supports their argument that the reimbursement of costs incurred in relation to pre-employment training qualifies for exemption under section 250. The facts in that appeal, which the Special Commissioner allowed, were somewhat unusual. The decision will not necessarily apply in other cases where the facts are different.
The general rule is that pre-employment education costs cannot be claimed. If that was the case, every pilot, doctor (even accountant) would be claiming for the education costs they incurred (and paid for) before they started working".
You can always "take a flyer" with a tax claim and see how you get on.
There can only be one of two outcomes
Edited by Eric Mc on Sunday 18th January 07:14
Gassing Station | Finance | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff