"Motoring-related taxes for fiscal year 2011/12, including fuel duties and VED, are estimated that will amount to more than GB£38 billion, representing almost 7% of total UK taxation."
C2W Scheme - Proof of 50% worth of commuting??
- Thread starter smokeysmoo
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
"Motoring-related taxes for fiscal year 2011/12, including fuel duties and VED, are estimated that will amount to more than GB£38 billion, representing almost 7% of total UK taxation."
And it's still not enough to cover the total cost.
What Philip Green does. What Starbucks does. What Amazon does are all within the rules.
CopperBrompton
Bicycle: a means of transport between cake-stops
- Location
- London
No, you said "fiddling his expenses" which is fraud. The things you now describe are legal, just as DCL's use of a tax avoidance scheme to obtain more benefit is legal.
As I say, you can criticise the morality if you wish, but you can't equate tax avoidance with criminal behaviour.
CopperBrompton
Bicycle: a means of transport between cake-stops
- Location
- London
Agreed, and I don't see DCL denying this.
SquareDaff
Über Member
- Location
- Doncaster, South Yorkshire
Not biting - but if it bothers you that much then follow the 2nd part of that sentence (i.e. the bit you didn't highlight)
but he does deny that the behaviour is unethical.
JoeyB
Go on, tilt your head!
- Location
- Fareham, Hampshire
I think it comes down to individual conscience....so no point trying to split hairs on that.
vickster
Legendary Member
Aren't people who use the cycle to work schemes actually taxpayers too? Given they are in work and presumably paying tax? I think knees up is a little bitter that c2w doesn't apply to him, but then I don't think he commutes to a place of work (could be wrong). I am sure there are taxation rules / accounting guidelines for the self employed that are beneficial versus paye. I have friends who are self employed, similar salary to me, who seem to pay far less tax!
The objective of the C2W scheme is to encourage cycle commuting, and make it easier for people to afford to buy a bike for commuting.
Using the scheme multiple times to subsidise a hobby is unethical.
Paul99
Über Member
I have had a bike for the last 2 years on C2W. 1st was a CX, 2nd a 29er. CX is used spring, summer, autumn. 29er in the winter. I don't think this is unethical.
I wasn't going to get another bike on the scheme in October. Think I might now.
w00hoo_kent
One of the 64K
- Location
- Maidstone or Greenwich
I'd have thought a decent accountant would have got @KneesUp a way of claiming back costs on a bike that he could justify as a work expense. I have a friend whose accountant claims back his breakfasts every morning. There are lots of things you can do if you're self employed, a good accountant comfortably pays for themselves on that front.
w00hoo_kent
One of the 64K
- Location
- Maidstone or Greenwich
I suggest for your ethics you stick at one then. Mine, much like @Paul99 were perfectly comfortable with me owning 2. They do different commuting jobs. I do more cycle commuting miles because I own both. Personally, I wouldn't buy a bike I wasn't intending to commute at all and when we bought my wife a bike we did it straight from the shop, but then that's my choice. I've friends who are comfortable with doing stuff like that, that's theirs. I'm pretty sure none of us are having restless nights because of our own choices.
