Get free updates - subscribe to our monthly newsletter Subscribe
I'm looking here at the differences in tax treatment of money spent on repairs and a new building or improvement to an existing building.
The cost of repairing an existing asset can be offset in full against profits in the year that it is incurred. The cost of a new building or an improvement to an existing building is treated as capital expenditure and while capital allowances may be due on some of the cost, it is likely that part of the expenditure will receive no tax relief at all.
An example of the difficulties that can result in trying to work out whether expenditure is a repair or capital expenditure is illustrated by a tax tribunal from a few years ago. A dairy farmer was receiving complaints from milk tanker drivers as to the state of his lane. He therefore spent a sizeable sum in having tarmac laid etc and this amount was claimed as a repair in his accounts. HMRC argued that the lane had been replaced in its entirety and was a new asset and was capital expenditure. A farm lane does not qualify for capital allowances and the farmer faced the prospect of getting no tax relief at all on the cost.
Thankfully the tribunal accepted that the money was spent putting the lane back into its original condition rather than improving it, and the farmer got his tax relief. Had the new lane been wider or capable of carrying heavier lorries, then the cost may have been classed as an improvement.
Furthermore, HMRC now accept that the use of modern materials or improved technology does not in itself make something an improvement. In the past they argued that the replacement of single glazed windows with double glazing was an improvement but they have changed their view on this in recent years.
There have been a couple of other more recent cases, not involving farmers, where HMRC attempts to deny tax relief on repair expenditure were rejected by the courts. This is an extremely complicated area and it is necessary to carefully review the work that has been done in order to maximise the tax relief available.
Keith Johnston - Tax Director
If you like this article and would like our FREE updates sent straight to your inbox then subscribe to our monthly newsletterSubscribe
All content © 2015 Armstrong Watson. All Rights Reserved. Website by Simon Pighills.
Armstrong Watson LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales, number OC415608. The registered office is 15 Victoria Place, Carlisle, CA1 1EW where a list of members is kept. Armstrong Watson LLP is regulated by the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales for a range of investment business activities. Unless otherwise indicated, either expressly or by the context, we use the word “partner” to describe a member of Armstrong Watson LLP or an employee of Armstrong Watson LLP in their capacity as such.
Armstrong Watson Audit Limited is registered to carry on audit work in the UK and Ireland by the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales. Registered as a limited company in England and Wales, number 8800970. The registered office is 15 Victoria Place, Carlisle, CA1 1EW.
Armstrong Watson Financial Planning Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Firm reference number 542122. Registered as a limited company in England and Wales, number 7208672. The registered office is 15 Victoria Place, Carlisle, CA1 1EW. Armstrong Watson Financial Planning & Wealth Management is a trading style of Armstrong Watson Financial Planning Limited.
Armstrong Watson Trustees Limited is a limited company registered in England and Wales, number 84495656. The registered office is 15 Victoria Place, Carlisle, CA1 1EW.