Manipay Limited v The Commissioners for HMRC

Manipay Limited v The Commissioners for HMRC

Each assignment was a separate employment and the workplace for each assignment was a permanent workplace under s 339 ITEPA 2003. Therefore, subsistence expenses were not deductible. Benchmark scale rates could not be used without a dispensation, and only actual expenses incurred could be deducted. Mainpay failed to take reasonable care, so the extended time limit for assessment applied.

Parties
Appellant: Mainpay Limited; Respondents: The Commissioners for His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 December 2022
Procedural Posture
Tax Appeal / First Tier Tribunal (tax Chamber) Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Income Tax, PAYE, National Insurance Contributions, Temporary Workers, Subsistence Expenses, Contracts of Employment, Agency Contracts, Overarching Contracts, Permanent Workplace, Benchmark Scale Rates, Dispensation, Carelessness in Tax Matters
Tax Law Employment Law Income Tax PAYE National Insurance Contributions Temporary Workers Subsistence Expenses Contracts of Employment +6 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 26 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mainpay Limited

Appellant

The Commissioners for His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Tax Appeal / First Tier Tribunal (tax Chamber) Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether subsistence expenses reimbursed to temporary workers are deductible for income tax and NIC purposes under ss 338 and 339 ITEPA 2003
  2. 2 Whether workers were employed under a contract of employment or agency contract
  3. 3 If agency contract, whether all assignments form part of a single deemed employment under ss 44 and 45 ITEPA 2003

Ratio Decidendi

Each assignment was a separate employment and the workplace for each assignment was a permanent workplace under s 339 ITEPA 2003. Therefore, subsistence expenses were not deductible. Benchmark scale rates could not be used without a dispensation, and only actual expenses incurred could be deducted. Mainpay failed to take reasonable care, so the extended time limit for assessment applied.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Regulation 80 Determinations and Section 8 Decision Notices for all years are upheld.