Can I claim an IT Training course as an expense?

[malvolio]

Actually, I have both these skills including the marketing mentioned above plus a dozen 'unrelated' skills beside. If you're a one trick ITIL pony than that's your choice but the most successful longterm contractors have generalistic skills and/or upgrade or upskill.

So your argument holds no water unless you are constrained by your own ability.

35 years in IT and related disciplines. Project and programme management, transition management, service management consultancy for all flavours of ITIL, interim IT management, interim Head of IT, service architecture and process improvement. Plus assorted technical skills embracing applications development, datacentre design, office relocations and platform upgrades. Plus a couple of directorships and some freelance writing. Project budgets up to £250m and P&Ls up to £17m. Dan grades in three martial arts. And I can cook a bit as well but one doesn't like to boast.

So nope, sod all knowledge of anything. Quelle dommage...

[ASB]

Thank you all for your comments. They have been truly helpful and insightful! I had initially spoken to a few friends and colleagues that have been contracting for years, and all of them said they could see no problem in claiming it as an expense.

Yes, this course is linked to one of the automated tools that are heavily used in many industries now and used by either developers or test analysts, which is my field.

Go ahead claim it. I probably would.

The link nluk posted is absolutely clear. It has to be existing trade.

Hmit may be reluctant to accept that if the course was taken before you got the contract...

[MarillionFan]

35 years in IT and related disciplines. Project and programme management, transition management, service management consultancy for all flavours of ITIL, interim IT management, interim Head of IT, service architecture and process improvement. Plus assorted technical skills embracing applications development, datacentre design, office relocations and platform upgrades. Plus a couple of directorships and some freelance writing. Project budgets up to £250m and P&Ls up to £17m. Dan grades in three martial arts. And I can cook a bit as well but one doesn't like to boast.

So nope, sod all knowledge of anything. Quelle dommage...

So, apologies. In response to the OP's question, yes, you can claim for related training (if you can 'prove' it's related to your business. In response to Malvolio, yes, you are correct, you cannot claim for the chip on your shoulder. GNight.

[ASB]

If you need to crosstrain your staff for new skills then it is 100% expensable.

Not necessarily.

Already trade in stuff, claimable.

Get work in stuff, then train. Claimable.

Train, then get work in stuff. Not claimable.

[NotAllThere]

Y...Jeez, it's not difficult. If the training can be shown to be directly related to your trade, which is defined as whatever it is you do to earn your income - then it's claimable against tax. If it's not directly related, it isn't...

That's easy then. My company's business is IT consultancy across the board. You name, we'll consult on it. Just like any big consultancy that trains its staff then places them on site.

It comes down to what's defined as being part of your trade and what isn't. That's where the fuzziness lies.

Sigh....

"Wholly and exclusively" is not in the least bit fuzzy. Heigh ho.

That reminds me very much of one Dawn Primarolo who, when asked about the uncertainty that IR35 caused contractors replied something like "There is no uncertainty. If you're caught you have to pay". Shame on you.

If you feel that you can justify that the course you wish to do is part of your trade, then take the course and deduct it. Be aware of the possibility that an investigation might find that it wasn't deductable. If it does, then you'll have to pay interest and possibly penalties. Something connected with what you currently do = low risk. Flower arranging = high risk. (Unless you're a florist).

btw - I work primarily in SAP. I once took a Broadvision course as there was a possibility of work involving both and I only had SAP. HMRC were quite happy with it being entirely deductable. I didn't get the work though.

[Notascooby]

btw - I work primarily in SAP. I once took a Broadvision course as there was a possibility of work involving both and I only had SAP. HMRC were quite happy with it being entirely deductable. I didn't get the work though.

Probably just as well -Broadvision was a pile of tulip (speaks someone that did 3 years in it)

[NotAllThere]

Well, it would have been SAP and BroadVision. I don't regret taking the course. It came in handy a few years later when I needed to do some JavaScript on a contract. (I'd never done it before, but worked on the principle of "it can't be that difficult").

[nomadd]

I once took a Broadvision course as there was a possibility of work involving both and I only had SAP. HMRC were quite happy with it being entirely deductable.

I think that's the crux here (and also that your typical HMRC inspector doesn't know arse-from-elbow when it comes to IT.) As long as the course is IT-related, I very much doubt any inspector is going to refuse an I.T. course from being expensed. I've had a couple of Tax Inspections in my time as a contractor and they've never queried anything like this - in fact they've been quite the opposite, and pointed out things I could claim for which I wasn't.

[centurian]

That reminds me very much of one Dawn Primarolo who, when asked about the uncertainty that IR35 caused contractors replied something like "There is no uncertainty. If you're caught you have to pay".

And yes, this is the very same Dawn Primarolo (nicknamed Red Dawn for her hard lefty views) - who seem incapable of following those same principles regarding her own expense claims