Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.

BIK on N1 Commercial 5 Seater Discovery

  • 25-09-2013 03:17PM
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 661 ✭✭✭


    Hi,

    Is anyone running a 5 Seat Discovery (Utility) as a company vehicle? If so what BIK are you paying on it i.e. Is it 5% Commercial or Car based BIK?

    I am getting conflicting advice from different sources and my accountant is reluctant to commit one way or the other.

    Thanks in advance
    YB


«13

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 215 ✭✭Bold Abdu


    Yawlboy wrote: »
    Hi,

    Is anyone running a 5 Seat Discovery (Utility) as a company vehicle? If so what BIK are you paying on it i.e. Is it 5% Commercial or Car based BIK?

    I am getting conflicting advice from different sources and my accountant is reluctant to commit one way or the other.

    Thanks in advance
    YB

    To qualify for the 5% rate as a van, it needs to be a van.

    As per Revenue
    A van means a mechanically propelled vehicle which –
    • is designed or constructed solely or mainly for the carriage of goods or other burden, and
    • has a roofed area or areas to the rear of the driver's seat, and
    • has no side windows or seating fitted in that roofed area or areas.
    Where a crew cab or other similar type of vehicle meets all of these criteria it would be regarded as a van rather than a car – see Private Use of Company Cars regarding the meaning of 'car'.


    So basically, no seats behind the driver seats.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,344 ✭✭✭The Dagda


    Yawlboy wrote: »
    Hi,

    Is anyone running a 5 Seat Discovery (Utility) as a company vehicle? If so what BIK are you paying on it i.e. Is it 5% Commercial or Car based BIK?

    I am getting conflicting advice from different sources and my accountant is reluctant to commit one way or the other.

    Thanks in advance
    YB

    Apparently the Discovery 4 Utility IS classed as an N1 Commercial so it should allow you to calculate the BIK off the 5% rate.

    There doesn't seem to be any clear information online to confirm this, so I'm guessing Landrover Ireland don't want to make too much noise about it in case Revenue close this apparent loop hole.

    I've read that it may qualify due to the load bay length being a certain percentage of the wheelbase. Basically a crewcab with an enclosed body.

    For clarification you should speak to a main dealer, and the confirmation would be on the log book where it would/should/could be classed as N1.

    If you're looking at buying one, this website claims that you can buy a new one from UK/NI with a better spec and for "a lot less" money

    http://www.luckwill.net/land-rovers/land-rover-discovery-4---uk-commercial-version-importing-into-ireland


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 661 ✭✭✭Yawlboy


    Its definitely an N1 - however the dealers are unable/unwilling to comment on the BIK status. I find it very strange that for VAT, VRT and Motor Tax its treated as a commercial but no one will confirm the BIK status.

    The other strange thing is that the dealer reckons it should be NCT'd after 4 years not DOE'd every year!!! :confused::confused::confused:

    I've asked my accountant to write to Revenue and get a formal ruling.

    I've also spoken to Mitsubishi about the Pajero Executive 5 seater - they say its N1, VAT reclaimable, low VRT, €333 Motor Tax but full BIK!!!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,344 ✭✭✭The Dagda


    Yawlboy wrote: »
    Its definitely an N1 - however the dealers are unable/unwilling to comment on the BIK status. I find it very strange that for VAT, VRT and Motor Tax its treated as a commercial but no one will confirm the BIK status.

    The other strange thing is that the dealer reckons it should be NCT'd after 4 years not DOE'd every year!!! :confused::confused::confused:

    I've asked my accountant to write to Revenue and get a formal ruling.

    I've also spoken to Mitsubishi about the Pajero Executive 5 seater - they say its N1, VAT reclaimable, low VRT, €333 Motor Tax but full BIK!!!

    It seems to be a real "Irish" type situation, which means you won't get one definitive answer, just lots of different opinions.

    You need to speak to someone who has one, and find out how to handle it. Maybe the motors thread would be a better place to ask?

    I'd be amazed if you get written confirmation on this issue from Revenue. If you do, please let us know.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 972 ✭✭✭Mc-BigE


    I'm also looking into one of these, but as my years km's wont be crazy my BIK as a company car could be 24 to 30% depending on yearly km's.

    if my company is audit in say, 5 years time and revenue rule that i should have been paying car BIK and not van BIK, then on a 50000 euro landrover ,that could be a bill of over 60000! BIK (less the 5% van BIK i would of paid as a van)
    and penalties and interest if they fell like making an example out of me.

    Im not sure if im just looking for these landrovers on the road, but there seems to be a lot more of these around in 141 or 142 reg. so they must be selling.

    is there any update on these, is there anything in writing that says for certain that its classed as a 5% or 30% BIK for company's.

    thanks


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,853 ✭✭✭✭Marcusm


    Mc-BigE wrote: »
    I'm also looking into one of these, but as my years km's wont be crazy my BIK as a company car could be 24 to 30% depending on yearly km's.

    if my company is audit in say, 5 years time and revenue rule that i should have been paying car BIK and not van BIK, then on a 50000 euro landrover ,that could be a bill of over 60000! BIK (less the 5% van BIK i would of paid as a van)
    and penalties and interest if they fell like making an example out of me.

    Im not sure if im just looking for these landrovers on the road, but there seems to be a lot more of these around in 141 or 142 reg. so they must be selling.

    is there any update on these, is there anything in writing that says for certain that its classed as a 5% or 30% BIK for company's.

    thanks

    I suspect recoverability of VAT is driving purchases more so than BIK considerations.

    As regards BIK, it's hard to see how a 5 seat Disco is designed primarily for the trnsport of goods - I would have thought that this would require more space given over to goods. That being said, I understand lots of advisers are getting on the bandwagon promoting use of these vehicles, especially in the builder/developer segment.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,002 ✭✭✭veetwin


    Mc-BigE wrote: »
    I'm also looking into one of these, but as my years km's wont be crazy my BIK as a company car could be 24 to 30% depending on yearly km's.

    if my company is audit in say, 5 years time and revenue rule that i should have been paying car BIK and not van BIK, then on a 50000 euro landrover ,that could be a bill of over 60000! BIK (less the 5% van BIK i would of paid as a van)
    and penalties and interest if they fell like making an example out of me.

    Im not sure if im just looking for these landrovers on the road, but there seems to be a lot more of these around in 141 or 142 reg. so they must be selling.

    is there any update on these, is there anything in writing that says for certain that its classed as a 5% or 30% BIK for company's.

    thanks

    Bumping this thread to see if anyone can clarify what the situation with BIK is? McBigE did you end up getting one in the end? Test drove one today but no one seems to know what the tax/BIK position is.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 735 ✭✭✭Alan Shore


    I'm not sure where the confusion is I think Revenue's view is clear if it's not a van then it's a car:
    How the vehicle is treated depends on whether it falls within the definition of a 'car' or the definition of a 'van'.
    Essentially, a 'car' means; any mechanically propelled road vehicle designed, constructed or adapted for the carriage of the driver or the driver and one or more persons other than (a) a motorcycle, (b) a van or (c) a vehicle not commonly used as a private vehicle and unsuitable to be so used. The definition of a car includes motorcycles over 410kgs.
    A van means a vehicle which was designed or constructed solely or mainly for the carriage of goods or other burden, and which has a roofed area or areas to the rear of the driver's seat and no seats or side windows in that area.
    Adapting say a four - seater crew cab (e.g. taking out the back seats) would not change the vehicle from being a car to a van, as subsequent adaptation cannot alter the original purpose of design or construction. Even with the back seats removed, the vehicle would still be classed as a car for benefit in kind purposes having regard to the original construction. If the vehicle does fall into the definition of a van, the vehicle is not automatically excluded from the benefit in kind charge. There will be no charge to tax, where all of the following conditions are satisfied:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,002 ✭✭✭veetwin


    Alan Shore wrote: »
    I'm not sure where the confusion is I think Revenue's view is clear if it's not a van then it's a car

    The confusion for me at least is I see loads of these 5 seat Discoverys on the road. Some are taxed at the commercial rate, others are paying the private rate of c €1450. My question is are those paying the commercial rate paying BIK?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 661 ✭✭✭Yawlboy


    veetwin wrote: »
    The confusion for me at least is I see loads of these 5 seat Discoverys on the road. Some are taxed at the commercial rate, others are paying the private rate of c €1450. My question is are those paying the commercial rate paying BIK?

    If they are company cars then they must be paying full BIK (according to my accountants) if not then they can be done for tax evasion.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,002 ✭✭✭veetwin


    Yawlboy wrote: »
    If they are company cars then they must be paying full BIK (according to my accountants) if not then they can be done for tax evasion.

    And if they are bought by sole traders or company directors and used both for work and for personal use?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 735 ✭✭✭Alan Shore


    veetwin wrote: »
    And if they are bought by sole traders or company directors and used both for work and for personal use?

    Sole traders don't pay BIK the amount of capital allowances will be restricted to €24,000.

    Directors of companies are employees and pay BIK based on the OMV.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 972 ✭✭✭Mc-BigE


    For me , it was too much of a risk. My accountant says 30% BIK every year. Thats too much for me.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 972 ✭✭✭Mc-BigE


    just spotted this jeep grand cherokee from a dealer in cork, and at the bottom of the advert is this:

    "THE JEEP GRAND CHEROKEE HAS NOW ATTAINED N-1 STATUS MEANING YOU CAN TAX IT COMMERCIALLY AND RECLAIM VAT IF YOU ARE VAT REGISTERED WHICH NOW MAKES THE JEEP GRAND CHEROKEE EVEN BETTER VALUE" (sorry about the caps, just cut and paste from the website!)

    its typical ireland, where a car is a not a van , but is a van!

    when will the goverment sort this whole BIK thing out?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,853 ✭✭✭✭Marcusm


    Mc-BigE wrote: »
    just spotted this jeep grand cherokee from a dealer in cork, and at the bottom of the advert is this:

    "THE JEEP GRAND CHEROKEE HAS NOW ATTAINED N-1 STATUS MEANING YOU CAN TAX IT COMMERCIALLY AND RECLAIM VAT IF YOU ARE VAT REGISTERED WHICH NOW MAKES THE JEEP GRAND CHEROKEE EVEN BETTER VALUE" (sorry about the caps, just cut and paste from the website!)

    its typical ireland, where a car is a not a van , but is a van!

    when will the goverment sort this whole BIK thing out?

    What is there for them to sort out, exactly?

    Whether something can carry motor tax at commercial rates has nothing to do with how it should be treated for BIK purposes. A "van" for BIK purposes is something designed to carry goods and which has no seats behind the driver's seat. Phliosphically, there is a good reason why this should carry a lower BIK rate than a vehicle with multiple passenger seats - the reason being that it is of limited private use as it cannot carry a standard family around. Contrast that with the position of a 5 seat Discovery, crew cab or similar. Significant private use of such a vehicle can be made and the greater "benefit" is recognised in the higher amount of income deemed to arise from use of such a vehicle.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 972 ✭✭✭Mc-BigE


    Marcusm wrote: »
    What is there for them to sort out, exactly?

    Whether something can carry motor tax at commercial rates has nothing to do with how it should be treated for BIK purposes. A "van" for BIK purposes is something designed to carry goods and which has no seats behind the driver's seat. Phliosphically, there is a good reason why this should carry a lower BIK rate than a vehicle with multiple passenger seats - the reason being that it is of limited private use as it cannot carry a standard family around. Contrast that with the position of a 5 seat Discovery, crew cab or similar. Significant private use of such a vehicle can be made and the greater "benefit" is recognised in the higher amount of income deemed to arise from use of such a vehicle.

    I understand your point, that BIK is nothing to do with motor tax , commercial or private.

    i just feel that if a N1 class vehicle is taxed the same as a 2 seater commercial van 333 euro, then by that logic revenue should also have BIK as 5% for N1. the same as a 2 seater van.

    or else make N1 class private motor tax rates, if you are driving around with Wife and kids in the back.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,853 ✭✭✭✭Marcusm


    Mc-BigE wrote: »
    I understand your point, that BIK is nothing to do with motor tax , commercial or private.

    i just feel that if a N1 class vehicle is taxed the same as a 2 seater commercial van 333 euro, then by that logic revenue should also have BIK as 5% for N1. the same as a 2 seater van.

    or else make N1 class private motor tax rates, if you are driving around with Wife and kids in the back.

    When an N1 is first presented for motor tax, you are required to provide a formal declaration that there will not be any private or non commercial use. If gu make that declaration truthfully, you would never expect to have your wife and kids in it. Irrespective of the validity of the motor tax, the VRT is at a reduced rate for N1 vehicles.

    Separately, the BIK seeks to tax the benefit you get which is equivalent to a passenger vehicle not a van. If your employer forces you to use a Disco for work, simply avoid the BIK by eschewing any private use. Otherwise, settle down and pay is your only option.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24 Mini-E


    Interesting thread this, as I'm looking at one of these 'type' of vehicles for an employee instead of a fully commercial without seats. Just curious about BIK

    Could these vehicles not be classified as a van, as stated already the definition of a van...
    "A van means a vehicle which was designed or constructed solely or mainly for the carriage of goods or other burden, and which has a roofed area or areas to the rear of the driver's seat and no seats or side windows in that area"

    If these are classed as N1 vehicles could it not be argued that they have being designed mainly for carriage of goods. They do have a roofed area behind the drivers seat*** It says no where in this definition that there can be or can not be seats inbetween that roofed area and the drivers seat, it simply says behind the drivers seat(the carriage area is in fact behind the drivers seat) And there is no seats or windows "in that area" ***that area being the carriage area, or the boot.

    I know these are not true vans in a traditional way, but given that definition could it not be argued that they are infact a van

    Opinions please....


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,853 ✭✭✭✭Marcusm


    Mini-E wrote: »
    Interesting thread this, as I'm looking at one of these 'type' of vehicles for an employee instead of a fully commercial without seats. Just curious about BIK

    Could these vehicles not be classified as a van, as stated already the definition of a van...
    "A van means a vehicle which was designed or constructed solely or mainly for the carriage of goods or other burden, and which has a roofed area or areas to the rear of the driver's seat and no seats or side windows in that area"

    If these are classed as N1 vehicles could it not be argued that they have being designed mainly for carriage of goods. They do have a roofed area behind the drivers seat*** It says no where in this definition that there can be or can not be seats inbetween that roofed area and the drivers seat, it simply says behind the drivers seat(the carriage area is in fact behind the drivers seat) And there is no seats or windows "in that area" ***that area being the carriage area, or the boot.

    I know these are not true vans in a traditional way, but given that definition could it not be argued that they are infact a van

    Opinions please....

    Are you suggesting that you interpret this as meaning that you expect to have rear seats but none directly behind the driver? That's not a reasonable construction of the words. As an employer, if you misreport the classification of the vehicle for BIK purposes, you will become liable not only for the employee's tax (the effective penalty for misfiring a P.11d) but also penalties or interest which would undoubtedly be of a similar amount.

    That would be a silly exposure. If you need to run a crew cab and the employees don't want to pay the BIK then you need to ensure that there is no private use including no overnights at home.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 972 ✭✭✭Mc-BigE


    Mini-E wrote: »
    Interesting thread this, as I'm looking at one of these 'type' of vehicles for an employee instead of a fully commercial without seats. Just curious about BIK

    Could these vehicles not be classified as a van, as stated already the definition of a van...
    "A van means a vehicle which was designed or constructed solely or mainly for the carriage of goods or other burden, and which has a roofed area or areas to the rear of the driver's seat and no seats or side windows in that area"

    If these are classed as N1 vehicles could it not be argued that they have being designed mainly for carriage of goods. They do have a roofed area behind the drivers seat*** It says no where in this definition that there can be or can not be seats inbetween that roofed area and the drivers seat, it simply says behind the drivers seat(the carriage area is in fact behind the drivers seat) And there is no seats or windows "in that area" ***that area being the carriage area, or the boot.

    I know these are not true vans in a traditional way, but given that definition could it not be argued that they are infact a van

    Opinions please....

    I also was thinking the same way as you, ie the roofed,no windows goods part of the landrover disco is to the "rear" of the drivers seat and not directly behind the seat. but i would suggest that no one in revenue is going to agree with you. ( if they do and tell you in writing, then let us know!) but if your employee is caught with kids/wife in the back , then it might be hard to explain that one away.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 735 ✭✭✭Alan Shore


    Mini-E wrote: »
    Interesting thread this, as I'm looking at one of these 'type' of vehicles for an employee instead of a fully commercial without seats. Just curious about BIK

    Could these vehicles not be classified as a van, as stated already the definition of a van...
    "A van means a vehicle which was designed or constructed solely or mainly for the carriage of goods or other burden, and which has a roofed area or areas to the rear of the driver's seat and no seats or side windows in that area"

    If these are classed as N1 vehicles could it not be argued that they have being designed mainly for carriage of goods. They do have a roofed area behind the drivers seat*** It says no where in this definition that there can be or can not be seats inbetween that roofed area and the drivers seat, it simply says behind the drivers seat(the carriage area is in fact behind the drivers seat) And there is no seats or windows "in that area" ***that area being the carriage area, or the boot.

    ....

    Not sure how you are coming to the conclusion that no seats or windows behind the drivers seat could mean anything else.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24 Mini-E


    No, just looking at the definition of a van.

    Looking at this definition, does it not say that a van requires a roofed area behind the drivers area and this area should not have seats or windows.

    Now looking at one of these N1 classed vehicles, strictly speaking could one not argue that there is an area behind the drivers seat (I'm talking about the boot area) that has no seats or windows. Just in the case of these type of N1 vehicles there happens to be seats INBETWEEN the drivers area and the carriage area.

    Basically what I'm saying is it doesn't say in the definition that the carriage area HAS to be DIRECTLY behind the drivers seat

    I realise this is bending the true definition but still, maybe this is the way people are getting around with paying the 5% bik??? Just thinking out loud here...

    @marcusm, you seem to know your stuff in this area, am I talkin complete waffle here or are some people claiming these type of vehicles as vans???

    There does seem to be abit of a grey area when it comes to these vehicles for me, I just bought a new van at ford and the ford sales guy told me the 4 seat Kuga was 5% BIK, (I was actually looking at the fully commercial kuga with no seats, so what he said got me thinking)... But thought I'd look into it a little more


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24 Mini-E


    Alan Shore wrote: »
    Not sure how you are coming to the conclusion that no seats or windows behind the drivers seat could mean anything else.

    Sorry missed this post, I'm saying that the definition doesn't say "that no seats or windows behind the drivers seat"

    It says no seats or windows "in that area", that area being the carriage area, the boot! ......now I'm starting to confuse myself haha....


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 972 ✭✭✭Mc-BigE


    I think that clarity is needed from the revenue on this, its a grey area, van or crew cab/car?
    but i would suggest that if they actually sat down and changed the wording for the definition of a van, im pretty sure that these N1 class commercials would be re-classed as "crew cabs" and full bik. unfortunately


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 7,974 ✭✭✭54and56


    Apologies for bumping this thread but it's the most relevant discussion of this topic I can find on Boards.

    I'm in the market for a vehicle which will primarily be used for long journeys to meetings around the country requiring the transportation of work materials and tools.

    If my company was to buy an N1 Commercial VW Touareg like this http://www.carzone.ie/used-cars/volkswagen/touareg/used-2015-152-volkswagen-touareg-cv-3-louth-fpa-200814629772588260 and I used it exclusively for work away from my office 80% of the time (I have an old TT I use for personal tipping around at weekends) would I legitimately be able to do the following:-

    1. Claim back the VAT through the company?
    2. Have the company pay all running costs of the vehicle i.e. tax, insurance, maintenance and diesel etc?
    3. Pay no BIK (or possibly 5% BIK) rather than 30% BIK?


    If not can someone explain why the car is certified as an N1 commercial vehicle but isn't treated for income tax purposes as an N1 commercial vehicle?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 972 ✭✭✭Mc-BigE


    If you do lots of business mileage, then bik could be as low as 6% bik on company car/crew cabs.

    Regarding your question, have a look at car pool section on the revenue's website http://www.revenue.ie/en/tax/it/leaflets/benefit-in-kind/private-use-cars.html#section4

    It explains what you need to do if your n1 commercial is to have 0 bik.

    And unfortunately once the're seats behind the driver's seats , then revenue class it as a crew cab, and bik of a car. Yes stupid system, but that's why we live in Ireland.😠

    Of course you could do what lots of people are doing and just ignore everything I just said above and drive away until your audited😉

    Everything else wise, crew cab vrt, vat if your vat registered. And 333 road tax are all legit.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 7,974 ✭✭✭54and56


    Thanks Mc-BigE,

    I looked at the revenue definition of a Van (http://www.revenue.ie/en/tax/it/leaflets/benefit-in-kind/private-use-vans.html#section3) and it says

    "Meaning of "van"

    A van means a mechanically propelled vehicle which –

    is designed or constructed solely or mainly for the carriage of goods or other burden, and
    has a roofed area or areas to the rear of the driver's seat, and
    has no side windows or seating fitted in that roofed area or areas.

    Where a crew cab or other similar type of vehicle meets all of these criteria it would be regarded as a van rather than a car – see Private Use of Company Cars regarding the meaning of 'car'."


    An N1 registered 5 seat Touareg/Disco/Pajero crewcab seems to legitimately qualify as a van because:-

    1. having such a large luggage area it is deemed to have been "constructed solely or mainly for the carriage of goods or other burden" (An important distinction is that the vehicle meets this requirement straight from the factory as opposed to removing a third row of seats from an originally manufactured passenger vehicle and retro certifying it as an N1 vehicle)

    2. it does in fact have an appropriately large roofed area to the rear of the drivers seat (there is no prohibition on there being a 2nd row of seats between the drivers seat and the "appropriately large roof area" i.e. it doesn't say the roofed area has to be "immediately" behind the drivers seat.

    3. it has no side windows or seating fitted in the defined roofed area.

    Am I misinterpreting Revenue's definition?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 972 ✭✭✭Mc-BigE


    I have pretty much being having this conversation in my head for the last 2 or 3 years ( yes I know, I don't have much of a life)

    Are N1 5 seater commercials vans, or cars for bik purposes.

    Best advice is ring the revenue and ask them because to me it's not clear. And get it in writing off them. My accountant has told me that it's classed as car for bik and van for everything else.

    I don't do more lots of business mileage as I work mainly on site for one company , long term contract. So not willing to chance it


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,853 ✭✭✭✭Marcusm


    Apologies for bumping this thread but it's the most relevant discussion of this topic I can find on Boards.

    I'm in the market for a vehicle which will primarily be used for long journeys to meetings around the country requiring the transportation of work materials and tools.

    If my company was to buy an N1 Commercial VW Touareg like this http://www.carzone.ie/used-cars/volkswagen/touareg/used-2015-152-volkswagen-touareg-cv-3-louth-fpa-200814629772588260 and I used it exclusively for work away from my office 80% of the time (I have an old TT I use for personal tipping around at weekends) would I legitimately be able to do the following:-

    1. Claim back the VAT through the company?
    2. Have the company pay all running costs of the vehicle i.e. tax, insurance, maintenance and diesel etc?
    3. Pay no BIK (or possibly 5% BIK) rather than 30% BIK?


    If not can someone explain why the car is certified as an N1 commercial vehicle but isn't treated for income tax purposes as an N1 commercial vehicle?

    Income tax, in particular BIK, has no categorisation of a vehicle as N1. For BIK purposes the point is to assess the practicable benefit of its use to an individual. Vehicles which have no seats behind the driver are perceived as having more limited private use and attract a lower BIK charge. Vehicles with passenger seats aft of the driver all carry the same method of assessing the taxable benefit.

    If I remember correctly, you have purchased a second hand Touareg? You are aware that the BIK is assessed on the original market value if the vehicle in Ireland, not what you paid for it?

    If you make no private use of the vehicle then there is no taxable benefit. Prepare to be treated with scepticism and keep very comprehensive records if you follow this route.

    Pooling arrangements for BIK will be irrelevant to you as a one man band company.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,853 ✭✭✭✭Marcusm


    Thanks Mc-BigE,

    I looked at the revenue definition of a Van (http://www.revenue.ie/en/tax/it/leaflets/benefit-in-kind/private-use-vans.html#section3) and it says

    "Meaning of "van"

    A van means a mechanically propelled vehicle which –

    is designed or constructed solely or mainly for the carriage of goods or other burden, and
    has a roofed area or areas to the rear of the driver's seat, and
    has no side windows or seating fitted in that roofed area or areas.

    Where a crew cab or other similar type of vehicle meets all of these criteria it would be regarded as a van rather than a car – see Private Use of Company Cars regarding the meaning of 'car'."


    An N1 registered 5 seat Touareg/Disco/Pajero crewcab seems to legitimately qualify as a van because:-

    1. having such a large luggage area it is deemed to have been "constructed solely or mainly for the carriage of goods or other burden" (An important distinction is that the vehicle meets this requirement straight from the factory as opposed to removing a third row of seats from an originally manufactured passenger vehicle and retro certifying it as an N1 vehicle)

    2. it does in fact have an appropriately large roofed area to the rear of the drivers seat (there is no prohibition on there being a 2nd row of seats between the drivers seat and the "appropriately large roof area" i.e. it doesn't say the roofed area has to be "immediately" behind the drivers seat.

    3. it has no side windows or seating fitted in the defined roofed area.

    Am I misinterpreting Revenue's definition?[/QUOTE]

    absolutely you are misinterpreting it; there are clearly seats behind the drivers seat. Additionally, it is clearly not a vehicle constructed to carry goods/burden as opposed to passengers. You are flogging a dead horse and likely being misled by the numerous dealers who don't know their Arse from their elbow in this arena.


Advertisement