The Best Connection Group Ltd v Revenue and Customs (INCOME TAX AND NATIONAL INSURANCE CONTRIBUTION) [2024] UKFTT 1103 (TC) (06 December 2024)
The Tribunal held that the salary sacrifice was a valid contractual term, but the payments for subsistence were 'round sum allowances' lacking a sufficient causal link to actual expenses and thus subject to tax and NICs. Payments for travel (mileage) were not 'round sum allowances' but the Appellant failed to prove, on the balance of probabilities, that all or a specified percentage of such payments related to actual mileage incurred. The dispensation did not cover the subsistence or public transport payments as they fell outside its terms. The Appellant did not exercise reasonable care in compliance and was not entitled to a Regulation 72 direction. The 2013 determination was likely made...
- Citation
- [2024] UKFTT 1103
- Parties
- Appellant: The Best Connection Group Limited; Respondents: The Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs
- Jurisdiction
- United Kingdom
- Judgment Date
- 06 December 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Tax Appeal (first Tier Tribunal, Tax Chamber) / Final Judgment on Liability, Quantum Reserved
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed except to the extent that the Appellant can establish, by evidence, that a specific mileage payment related to actual mileage incurred.
- Legal Topics
- Income Tax, National Insurance Contributions, Salary Sacrifice, Travel and Subsistence Expenses, PAYE Regulations, Dispensation, Overarching Employment Contracts
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
The Best Connection Group Limited
Appellant
The Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs
Respondents
Procedural Posture
Tax Appeal (first Tier Tribunal, Tax Chamber) / Final Judgment on Liability, Quantum Reserved
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the salary sacrifice arrangement was a valid contractual term despite lack of detail.
- 2 Whether payments for subsistence and travel were 'round sum allowances' lacking sufficient causal link to expenses incurred.
- 3 Whether evidence established that payments related to actual mileage or expenses incurred.
Ratio Decidendi
The Tribunal held that the salary sacrifice was a valid contractual term, but the payments for subsistence were 'round sum allowances' lacking a sufficient causal link to actual expenses and thus subject to tax and NICs. Payments for travel (mileage) were not 'round sum allowances' but the Appellant failed to prove, on the balance of probabilities, that all or a specified percentage of such payments related to actual mileage incurred. The dispensation did not cover the subsistence or public transport payments as they fell outside its terms. The Appellant did not exercise reasonable care in compliance and was not entitled to a Regulation 72 direction. The 2013 determination was likely made...
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed except to the extent that the Appellant can establish, by evidence, that a specific mileage payment related to actual mileage incurred.
Orders
- Appeal dismissed except for specific proven mileage payments.
- Quantum to be determined by agreement or at a later hearing.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment