Another 24 month / 40% question

[chrisl]

I have a query regarding an extension being offered for a client.

They are offering to relocate the main place of work from Scotland to London, this would be reflected by a change to the location of employment on a new contract. This would be to the contractors advantage as they live in London.

They are also willing to pay for accommodation/travel as and when he is required to work from the Scotland office (this would only ever be at their request, but could be for many days over the course of the next few months).

As he has previously worked continuously from Scotland for the last 28 months (and therefore no longer able to claim non-chargeable expenses for that location), I am concerned that any travel and/or accommodation provided for the contractor by the client could be interpreted as above the 40% rule and not allowable?

Does the fact the new contract with a London location change things, the trips back to Scotland will only be occasional so they are him being sent to do a quick job there rather than being a workplace as such.
I cannot work out if this would be allowable or not.

[Sockpuppet]

Should be allowable as long as he has a few months break from Scotland and its not contract changes and day 1 he's back in Scotland.

[northernladuk]

Client paying accommodation has absolutely nothing to do with you claiming expenses which is what the 2 year rule is about. Not really sure why you would think it does?