Get my latest blog post direct to your inbox every week!


01908 774323



Resurfacing A Haulage Yard: Repair Or Capital Improvement?

A First Tier Tribunal decides ...

Click here to view a mobile version of this blog post  

Posted by Helen Beaumont on 16/09/2020 @ 8:00AM

Work was carried out on a haulage yard to improve the surface. HMRC claimed it was a capital cost that improved a fixed asset, but the company disputed this at a tribunal ...

HMRC claimed the yard repairs were a capital improvement so the company took them to a tribunal!

HMRC claimed the yard repairs were a capital improvement so the company took them to a tribunal!

copyright: newroadboy / 123rf

The haulage company leased a combined factory and yard. The whole yard was used for loading and unloading of articulated lorries as well as trailer storage. You can imagine the surface would get quite broken up with all that weight rolling over it.

Although the articulated lorries were quite happy going over the ever-increasing potholes, the forklift trucks started to have problems when loading and unloading pallets, and when it became a Health & Safety hazard, the company decided that the entire yard needed resurfacing!

The remaining surface of the yard was removed, the sub-surface was levelled and strengthened, and then reinforced concrete was placed on top. The work also included drainage channels to extend the life of the new surface.

"This cost around £74,000 whereas moving to a new site would have been £6.5million!"

When the haulage company submitted their Corporate Tax return, HMRC disallowed the amount spent on the resurfacing as it considered it to be a capital expense. It was at this point that the company took HMRC to a First Tier Tribunal which needed to decide if the expenditure was a non-deductible capital expense (as HMRC claimed) or a deductible revenue expense.

HMRC argued that:

  • The size and importance of the yard meant it was a capital expense

  • The company had an advantage because they would not need to repair the yard for at least another 20-years

  • The works amounted to an improvement of the yard

However, the tribunal noted that a reduced need for future repairs does not in itself make the expenditure capital. Also, the company had not completely replaced the 'entirety' of the sub-surface, and there was no improvement to the yard compared to its original condition.

What is, and what is not, considered capital expenditure by HMRC has confounded both tax advisors and business people alike for centuries, and no one has yet to produce a simple test to determine the issue.

HMRC accepted the result of the appeal, but believed it to have fallen short of the ruling.

Until next time ...



Would you like to know more?

If anything I've written in this blog post resonates with you and you'd like to discover more, it may be a great idea to give me a call on 01908 774323 and let's see how I can help you.

Share the blog love ...

Google AMP  /  Précis  

Share this to FacebookShare this to TwitterShare this to LinkedInShare this to PinterestShare this via Buffer

#HMRC #RepairsVsCapitalImprovement #FTT #Tribunal #SME #Tax #MiltonKeynes #UK

About Helen Beaumont ...


Helen brings the personal tax planning experience of the top 20 tax companies to Essendon. Formerly of MacIntyre Hudson (with 45 offices nationwide), Helen worked at Chancery for more than 10 years before joining Essendon as the personal tax specialist.

Tax Planning can make a considerable difference to your tax liability. Helen has specialist knowledge and experience in tax planning and uses every opportunity to minimise your tax bill is utilised. By analysing your investments, income, profit and expenditures, Helen will provide strategic tax planning expertise that could offer significant savings, whilst delivering clear, honest advice and guidance.

When Helen is not at Essendon she spends time with her young son and likes going on long walks with the family dog.