Originally Posted by Whirlygig
Not being funny here but isn't that what I said?
Cheers
Whirls
Not being funny, either, but NO, that's specifically not what you said!
As I quoted, you actually said:"If the cost of private use of the asset is reimbursed to the company, then there is no benefit in kind."
And, as I said from my direct experience, that is categorically not the Revenue's position. Unless, that is, you would accept that the cost of 25 hours private use of an aeroplane per year equates to 20% of the accumulated capital cost of the aeroplane plus 50% of the annual fixed costs plus 100% of the variable costs for those 25 hours ... as in my case, where I was threatened with it being taken to the commissioners if I didn't agree to a benefit-in-kind of around £1,000 per hour (for my limited private usage) for a single-engine piston aeroplane despite paying 'normal' aircraft hire charges to the company for that usage!!
The aspect of the legislation that you are ignoring is summed up in the Inspectors letter to my advisors: "Sub-section 5 requires no more than that the asset is placed at the employees disposal. There is no requirement that the asset should be used."