Why are my runners not a tax rightoff like bike-to-work scheme

rom

It looks like I am going to but 5 pairs of runners this year at around 110 euro a pair. That's 550 euro. Now if my hobby was cycling then I could right some of this off against tax. Why can't I with my runners ?
Its the same thing tbh, I can run to work which I do at times just as easy as cycle.

What do you think ?

Stark

Fine, but you can only make a claim once every 5 years.

rom

Stark wrote: »

Fine, but you can only make a claim once every 5 years.

That would be fine with me. You can get a bike up to 1k in the bike-to-work which would be around 10 pairs of runners for me or two years worth. It would be better than nothing to get that much of a right-off.

Dubhlinner

Its a very fair point. In a country where 2/3 of the adult population are overweight I would like to see any costs related to physical activity be tax deductable. Eg membership of sports clubs/gyms etc

I suppose runners are more complicated than bikes as the vast majority of consumers buy them for fashion purposes. Ie nike air max being popular among inactive members of society

I'm sure there's a way you could distinguish somehow.

Cabaal

rom wrote: »

It looks like I am going to but 5 pairs of runners this year at around 110 euro a pair. That's 550 euro. Now if my hobby was cycling then I could right some of this off against tax. Why can't I with my runners ?
Its the same thing tbh, I can run to work which I do at times just as easy as cycle.

What do you think ?

Realistically though, just how many people are going to run to work?

The cycle scheme is a cycle to work scheme and is to encourage people to cycle to work, the fact that stats show a increase means its a viable alternative to driving,

When you consider that doing 10km - 50km is far far easier on a bike and take far far less time its only logical to cycle, time is a massive factor for people in the mornings.

Sure a tax write off would be nice but its just not going to happen and just imagine how many cheaper pairs of runners the tracksuit brigade would buy even though they have no intention of ever using them to run in.

mloc123

Cabaal wrote: »

rom wrote: »

It looks like I am going to but 5 pairs of runners this year at around 110 euro a pair. That's 550 euro. Now if my hobby was cycling then I could right some of this off against tax. Why can't I with my runners ?
Its the same thing tbh, I can run to work which I do at times just as easy as cycle.

What do you think ?

Realistically though, just how many people are going to run to work?

The cycle scheme is a cycle to work scheme and is to encourage people to cycle to work, the fact that stats show a increase means its a viable alternative to driving,

When you consider that doing 10km - 50km is far far easier on a bike and take far far less time its only logical to cycle, time is a massive factor for people in the mornings.

Sure a tax write off would be nice but its just not going to happen and just imagine how many cheaper pairs of runners the tracksuit brigade would buy even though they have no intention of ever using them to run in.

I have about 2000km on a pair or runners now, I am only considering changing them as there is now a hole in the sole.

What mileage ate you running to go through a pair every two to three months?

Brianderunner

mloc123 wrote: »

I have about 2000km on a pair or runners now, I am only considering changing them as there is now a hole in the sole.

What mileage ate you running to go through a pair every two to three months?

If i go past 300 miles on a pair my joints get sore, and it takes longer to recover from runs. That's alternating 2-3 pairs on different days. Depends on your running style i guess.

Beasty

The BTW scheme only works because it's treated as a non-taxable benefit in kind, and hence is only available to employees and directors subject to PAYE. It would be impractical for everyone to make individual claims for tax refunds from the Revenue. It's made as simple as possible to operate, and is completely at the discretion of the employer

How many employers out there are going to go to the trouble of setting up and administering a scheme to cover a pair of runners or other running gear? under the BTW scheme it's complete bikes (plus safety accessories) once every 5 years, and the employee must intend using them mainly for commuting. How many runners will commit to use their new gear mainly to run to and from work?

Basically at the level of expenditure we are talking about, it's completely impractical

pc11

Hint: Do the bike scheme at a shop that also sells running gear.

BeepBeep67

Zero VAT on exercise clothing and equipment - Simples

ted1

Can you bring the runners back as not being fit for purpose.

TFBubendorfer

Cabaal wrote: »

Realistically though, just how many people are going to run to work?

The cycle scheme is a cycle to work scheme and is to encourage people to cycle to work, the fact that stats show a increase means its a viable alternative to driving,

In reality though, at least 20 people in my company have used the bike-to-work scheme in the last couple of years to get a new bike and yet my bike is the only one at the bike stand virtually every day.

Realistically speaking, the run-to-work scheme is not going to happen, of course.

Dubhlinner

BeepBeep67 wrote: »

Zero VAT on exercise clothing and equipment - Simples

Equipment its straight forward. Problem with clothing is the lads who's exercise consists of walking to the taxi outside their door which brings them to a pub in a size 2XL man utd or celtic jersey - which also qualifies as sports clothing

rom

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

In reality though, at least 20 people in my company have used the bike-to-work scheme in the last couple of years to get a new bike and yet my bike is the only one at the bike stand virtually every day.

Realistically speaking, the run-to-work scheme is not going to happen, of course.

exactly, similar where I work. Run-to-work is not going to happen but I am just a tad annoyed by the scheme as I know one person that just went in and got bikes for the whole family instead and got a receipt for one bike

thirstywork2

http://www.letsrun.com/2012/free-shoes-0401.php

beeduybe

thirstywork2 wrote: »

http://www.letsrun.com/2012/free-shoes-0401.php

Hmm interesting date on that article.

Gringo78

rom wrote: »

It looks like I am going to but 5 pairs of runners this year at around 110 euro a pair. That's 550 euro. Now if my hobby was cycling then I could right some of this off against tax. Why can't I with my runners ?
Its the same thing tbh, I can run to work which I do at times just as easy as cycle.

What do you think ?

Runners get injured. A lot. So to encourage more pounding of the pavements to get to work would just over burden the health system with all sorts of ailments.

RacoonQueen

rom wrote: »

exactly, similar where I work. Run-to-work is not going to happen but I am just a tad annoyed by the scheme as I know one person that just went in and got bikes for the whole family instead and got a receipt for one bike

Must be crap bikes. You can only avail of 1000 euro on the scheme, anything above that you've to pay full whack.

Pisco Sour

Ha! I love this suggestion. But where do you draw the line? Might aswell get the government to pay for my spikes, club and competition fees, running gear, physio bills, because to subsidise just a pair of running shoes would be to reward mediocrity!

*Ducks behind couch*