So I can pay my plumber for fixing a leak with the loan of a laptop say, and there's no tax liability for either party?Benefits-in-kind only arise in the case of employer/employee relationships.
So I can pay my plumber for fixing a leak with the loan of a laptop say, and there's no tax liability for either party?Benefits-in-kind only arise in the case of employer/employee relationships.
Thanks, I was curious as to how it should be recorded, BIK or <insert X here> which is why my opening question was more vague:Ok @odyssey06 let’s back up.
If I engage Jack the plumber or the painter or the electrician, I am not his employer and I am not concerned with employer’s PRSI or his holiday pay or his leave entitlements or any other employer obligations. I pay him for his services, plus the VAT on those services.
As mentioned, benefits-in-kind only arise where there is an employer/employee relationship.
That doesn’t mean that certain barter arrangements do not attract a tax liability.
Both IFRS & GAAP accounting frameworks require barter arrangements to be included in business accounts based on an estimate of their monetary value.
Presumably that’s how Renault could reconcile the arrangement for tax purposes - the value of the car provided relative to the personal appearances received.Both IFRS & GAAP accounting frameworks require barter arrangements to be included in business accounts based on an estimate of their monetary value.
Is there any liability in terms of the income foregone in lieu of services provided?As mentioned, benefits-in-kind only arise where there is an employer/employee relationship.
That doesn’t mean that certain barter arrangements do not attract a tax liability.