No Result
View All Result
Benefits Expert
  • About
  • Advertise
  • Alerts
  • Events
  • Contact
  • NEWS
  • IN DEPTH
  • PROFILE
  • PENSIONS
  • GLOBAL REWARDS
  • FINANCIAL BENEFITS
  • HEALTH & WELLBEING
  • DIVERSITY & INCLUSION
  • PODCAST
No Result
View All Result
Benefits Expert
  • NEWS
  • IN DEPTH
  • PROFILE
  • PENSIONS
  • GLOBAL REWARDS
  • FINANCIAL BENEFITS
  • HEALTH & WELLBEING
  • DIVERSITY & INCLUSION
  • PODCAST

CIOT calls for changes to benefits taxation to remove complications

by Benefits Expert
31/07/2023
employees, employers, tax incentives, insurance benefits, staff, tax, savers, CIOT
Share on LinkedInShare on Twitter

The Chartered Institute of Taxation (CIOT) has called for tax exemptions to apply equally whether a benefit is paid for directly by the employer or reimbursed to employees at a later date.

Under current rules, a certain range of benefits are exempt from tax on the employee if paid for directly by their employer, or via a voucher scheme arranged by the organisation – known as ‘benefits in kind’. However, if the same benefits have been paid for by the employee and later reimbursed, that reimbursement is taxed as part of the employee’s earnings.

The CIOT said that the system should be realigned so that tax status is defined by what is being bought, not who is paying for it, adding that this would considerably simplify the system for all involved.

This would particularly affect those dealing with ‘trivial benefits’, namely ones where: the cost of providing the benefit does not exceed £50, the benefit is not cash or a cash voucher, the reward is not an element of the employee’s contract, salary sacrifice arrangement, or in recognition of success in their employment duties.

The CIOT made particular reference to flu jabs, where those provided in office or via a voucher, are eligible for the trivial benefit exemption. However, an employer which might not be able to afford the cost of hosting in-house or accessing vouchers, could instead reimburse staff who pay themselves, but this arrangement would not benefit from the same exemption, despite ultimately being the same arrangement.

Colin Ben-Nathan, chair of the Employment Taxes Committee at the CIOT, said: “Whether a benefit-in-kind or expense is tax exempt should be determined by its nature, not whether the employer directly incurs the cost or reimburses an employee for costs the employee has incurred.

“This difference in tax treatment can particularly affect smaller employers who may find it harder to set up corporate accounts or enter into voucher agreements with suppliers. We think this difference should be removed so that employer reimbursements are treated similarly to directly provided employer benefits.”

Matthew Rowbotham, partner and head of the rax, rewards and incentives group at law firm Lewis Silkin, told Benefits Expert: “The benefits-in-kind regime is complicated enough without the law drawing arbitrary distinctions between the different ways in which a benefit might be provided.

“The CIOT recommendation is an easy simplification to implement so we hope it will be taken up. If the law is changed in this way, businesses will still need to keep appropriate records to justify any tax-exempt reimbursement.”

RELATED POSTS

staff, short-term, money, Jessica Bird, employers, financial education

Financial education 50/30/20 budgeting rule dubbed ‘terrible advice’ 

Physio, musculoskeletal, cash plan

Unum launches Health Plan 360 in cash plan market shake up

Next Post
Starbucks UK employees to get free period products

Starbucks UK employees to get free period products

wellbeing

Worst hit wellbeing pillar is financial, study shows

SUMMIT

BENEFITS UNBOXED PODCAST

Benefits Unboxed
Benefits Unboxed

The podcast from Benefits Expert, the title for HR, reward and benefits professionals.

Seasoned professionals examine the challenges and innovations in today’s employee benefits, reward and HR sector. Every episode, they will unbox a key issue and unpack what it really means for employers and how they can tackle it.

The regulars are Claire Churchard, editor of Benefits Expert; Carole Goldsmith, HR director at the Royal Horticultural Society, and Steve Herbert, consultant and rewards & benefits veteran.

Benefits Unboxed – Hybrid work: reality versus rhetoric
byBenefits Expert from Definite Article Media

Return-to-office mandates are a topic that’s generating plenty of heat in the media, but how closely do the headlines match workplace reality? 

In this episode, one of a three-part series of 10-minute podcasts, hosts Claire Churchard and Steve Herbert discuss data that shows remote or home working is on the rise.

We look at what this means for HR, from balancing employee flexibility with business needs, to ensuring benefits packages remain fair and accessible. We discuss the pinch points, and the opportunities, in building the new normal of work.

Benefits Unboxed – Hybrid work: reality versus rhetoric
Benefits Unboxed – Hybrid work: reality versus rhetoric
31/08/2025
Benefits Expert from Definite Article Media
Search Results placeholder

GUIDE TO WORKPLACE PENSIONS



REQUEST A FREE COPY

OPINION

Steve Herbert, consultant, ambassador, reward, benefits, HR strategy

Steve Herbert: The art of the deal?

Lorna Ferrie, legal and compliance director, Mauve Group

Lorna Ferrie: hybrid is not a loophole, remote teams can’t ignore the pay transparency push

Holly Coe, Innecto Reward Consulting

Holly Coe: friendship is an overlooked superpower when tackling workplace absenteeism

Vitality. Pippa Andrews

Pippa Andrews: how to make exercise more enjoyable for women

SUBSCRIBE

Benefits Expert

© 2024 Definite Article Limited. Design by 71 Media Limited.

  • About
  • Advertise
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Contact

Follow Benefits Expert

No Result
View All Result
  • News
  • In depth
  • Profile
  • Pensions
  • Global rewards
  • Financial benefits
  • Health & wellbeing
  • Diversity & Inclusion