Mr Andrew Whitby & Mr Victor Ball v Her Majesty's Revenue & Customs
Decision date: 18 November 2009
Neutral citation: [2009] UKFTT 311 (TC)
Overall AI summary confidence: high
Short overview
This short overview is intended to summarise the case, issues and outcome so far as they are supported by the judgment.
AI confidence in this short overview: high
This case concerns appeals by two directors who leased cars from their employer/associated company and received mileage reimbursements; HMRC assessed car, fuel and excess mileage payments as taxable. The Tribunal held the cars were "made available" by the employer so car benefits under Chapter 6 ITEPA applied, the vehicles were "company vehicles" so the mileage payments did not qualify as AMAPs and were taxable, and advisory fuel rates (not lease rentals) govern the non-taxable element of mileage reimbursements; s.151 nil relief applies where no private fuel was paid. The appeals were dismissed.
Ratio decidendi
This summary is intended to identify the ratio decidendi, meaning the legal reasons for deciding and the binding part of the decision.
AI confidence in this ratio decidendi summary: medium
A vehicle is “made available” by an employer for Chapter 6 purposes even where use arises under an arm’s‑length lease between the employee and the employer or an associated company, so the cash equivalent car benefit rules (ss.114–121) apply; where a cash equivalent car benefit exists (even rendered nil after permitted s.144 deductions) the vehicle remains a “company vehicle” excluding AMAP relief under s.229(4)/s.236(2); mileage reimbursements are therefore taxable emoluments reducible only by advisory fuel rates and not by lease rental payments absent express statutory entitlement.
Obiter dicta
This summary is intended to identify obiter dicta, meaning observations made by the way that were not necessary to deciding the case and are not binding.
AI confidence in this obiter dicta summary: medium
The Tribunal noted that commercial or accounting characterisation of leases, and VAT treatment, are of limited assistance in construing the statutory benefit provisions, and expressed sympathy for the taxpayers’ commercial position while emphasising the statutory wording governs entitlement to employment expense reliefs (ss.336/337).