C2W Scheme - Proof of 50% worth of commuting??

[smokeysmoo]

I've searched but there's a gazzillion threads and life's too short TBH

I'm asking for a friend who's employer has just started the C2W scheme.

Long story short - he saw it as an easy way for n+1, but now says he'd have to prove at least 50% of his commutes were made by bike, and if he can't then he'd have to repay the full amount.

He has a company car and his position means that commuting by bike is not always possible.

I've never heard of this proof thing myself, but then again I've never had the chance to use C2W, or even know anyone directly who has.

So is this true, and if so how on earth can you prove, (or they disprove), that you have used it enough?

All replies will be passed on, thanks

 

[paddy01]

Don't know the actual situation but I have seen it used as an excuse for a company not to offer the scheme, i.e. having to check up that employees are doing the requisite number of commutes.

From what I can tell it sounds like cobblers to me.

 

[nappadang]

A lad I work with has never (to my knowledge) used his C2W bike to commute.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

The HMRC guidelines state:

The tax exemption only applies when an employee mainly uses the cycle and cyclists' safety equipment for qualifying journeys. A qualifying journey for an employee means a journey, or part of a journey,

 between his or her home and workplace, or

 between one workplace and another,

in connection with the performance of their duties of employment. So, for example, cycling to and from the station to get to work would qualify. In this case, 'mainly' means that more than 50% of use of the cycle and safety equipment must involve a qualifying journey .

​

That's not the same as '50% of his commutes must be by bike'. He only has to make sure that of the total use he makes of the bike, at least 50% of the journeys be qualifying ones. So, if he commutes on it even just one day a week and only rides it for fun one day of a weekend, he is complying with the terms.

I hope the difference is clear.

GC

 

[winjim]

I was under the impression that it's not 50% of commutes must be made by bike, but rather 50% of bike rides must be commutes. It was in my (NHS) scheme anyway.

Nobody checked, I just had to email them a photo at the end of the year to show I still had the bike and to assess market value.

ETA: Beaten to it by GC!

 

[KneesUp]

The HMRC guidelines state:

The tax exemption only applies when an employee mainly uses the cycle and cyclists' safety equipment for qualifying journeys. A qualifying journey for an employee means a journey, or part of a journey,

 between his or her home and workplace, or

 between one workplace and another,

in connection with the performance of their duties of employment. So, for example, cycling to and from the station to get to work would qualify. In this case, 'mainly' means that more than 50% of use of the cycle and safety equipment must involve a qualifying journey .

​

That's not the same as '50% of his commutes must be by bike'. He only has to make sure that of the total use he makes of the bike, at least 50% of the journeys be qualifying ones. So, if he commutes on it even just one day a week and only rides it for fun one day of a weekend, he is complying with the terms.

I hope the difference is clear.

GC

One commute per week and one recreational ride per week would not be more than 50% qualifying. I would also suggest that 'number of journeys' is not a good measure here - if your commute is a mile and you do that twice a week and then do a century every Sunday, there is no way you could argue that more than half of the use is for commuting, for example.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

One commute per week and one recreational ride per week would not be more than 50% qualifying. I would also suggest that 'number of journeys' is not a good measure here - if your commute is a mile and you do that twice a week and then do a century every Sunday, there is no way you could argue that more than half of the use is for commuting, for example.

Assuming he rides home again having ridden to work, he's made two qualifying journeys.

The guidelines use 'number of journeys' as the measure, not distance covered.


GC

 

[Milzy]

Our company doesn't Police it. We go by car most of the time but do meet up on evenings & weekends for leisure rides.

 

[winjim]

One commute per week and one recreational ride per week would not be more than 50% qualifying. I would also suggest that 'number of journeys' is not a good measure here - if your commute is a mile and you do that twice a week and then do a century every Sunday, there is no way you could argue that more than half of the use is for commuting, for example.

Assuming he rides home again having ridden to work, he's made two qualifying journeys.

The guidelines use 'number of journeys' as the measure, not distance covered.


GC

And they include safety equipment, so don't use your lights or wear a helmet at weekends!

 

[User33236]

My C2W scheme bike made a grand total of three return journeys to work in 12 months. The reason? I bought (not on C2W) a cyclocross bike that cost more the my C2W bike as the roads to and from work were sh!+ and the CX made more sense (as did disc brakes in the wet).

The orginal bike got heavily used on the weekends. Feeling guilty I therefore spoke to our C2W coordinator who had no issue and was happy that I was riding to and from work on whatever bike I chose.

I realise this situation was different but I was never at any point during the scheme asked to confirm my rides to work:leisure ride ratio not provide photos of the bike at the end of the year.

 

[400bhp]

Realistically they would only be intersted if you were seen to be taking the pish on a wider scale. Perhaps a one man company with other tax irregularities.

 

[confusedcyclist]

How exactly would you prove you are using the bike to commute, sounds like they are trying to put him off to me. Maybe saving some paperwork?

Unless of course you are submitting car mileage?

 

[DCLane]

My first C2W bike wasn't used for commuting once. The current one is used about once a month.

However, I do ride by bike 5 days a week.

Not once have I been asked to 'prove' anything.

 

[KneesUp]

My first C2W bike wasn't used for commuting once. The current one is used about once a month.

However, I do ride by bike 5 days a week.

Not once have I been asked to 'prove' anything.

Do you not feel you are defrauding other taxpayers?

 

[DCLane]

Do you not feel you are defrauding other taxpayers?

No. I commute 20+ miles by bike 5 days a week, which is probably more than 99% of other C2W users, many of whom never bother to ride to work at all.

It's a government system, which I'm making use of for Child Benefit purposes, since it reduces my overall income.

And the bikes do get used; my first one my wife uses and the second is an MTB that I use in the winter. Straight after I got my first C2W bike I won a road bike from Sustrans - and used that for commuting instead.

My work simply asks me to confirm that I ride to work more than 50% of the time, which is true. They don't ask which bike I use.