I wonder if you read this report about the freebies bonanza that afflicts those senior executives in the BBC? They have to endure being provided with the likes of Rugby Final tickets, Elton John concert tickets, even freebie cookery lessons with a Michelin-starred chef, poor dears. Naturally they take all these onerous tasks on the chin, such is their commitment to providing us with a public service without compare. Raise a glass of champagne to the pigs with their snouts in the trough of your financial largesse.
AIN’T LIFE GRAND?
Bookmark the permalink.
“The COMPANY however does not get a corporate tax deduction for any costs attributable to client or third party entertainment, although the lines are pretty arguable usually” –
no, they are not. The rules on deducting corporate entertainment were tightened considerably about 10-15 years ago.
Ben,
Either answer the question or don’t bother posting immature ripostes.
Do you work for the BBC?, and how on earth have you come to the conclusion that they are a ‘special case’?.
To assist you further when I am back in the office tomorrow I will publish the link to the company that I am employed withs own ethical and compliance rules, and please absorb this fact….my companies R&D budget on it’s own is a hell of a lot more than the BBC’s entire yearly licence tax, which means it employs people of a much higher calibre than most BBC employees, so exactly who is working for the more successful company?.
NO – client and third party entertaining is specifically non deductible. but staff entertaining is broadly deductible. so if you throw a do at ascot and invite some clients and staff, are those staff costs incidental to the client entertainment (and hence disallowable) or are they separable (and hence deductible). if you hold a business event but lay on dinner and drinks afterwards, where does the business event end and the hospitality begin?
if you’ve concluded that those lines are clear maybe you might be so kind as to let HMRC and the professional services professions know, as they still frequently argue about it
What exactly was it I said about the Daily Mail? Or have you been playing Straw-Alex in my absence?
“Alex – the wannabe James Carville.
Keep trying son – he’s an arsehole too.”
Honestly David, I pay you a compliment and this is how you react? Oh well, what did I expect? “Welcome sonny”? “Make yourself at home”? “Marry my daughter”?
As a matter of interest, in my parallel universe the code of ethics states that:
“Entertaining is an important part of many business relationships and can provide valuable opportunities for developing an understanding of the client’s business and for gaining the insight necessary for an effective and successful working relationship.”…”The general rule is that entertaining should be reasonable in terms of its cost, frequency and nature.”
There follow some specific guidelines and numbers. I suspect this is common to most firms. So the bottle of Chateau Lafite with lunch has gone, but not the Elton John tickets provided you haven’t been on a cookery course with the same people last week.
I do though see the point re: BBC staff specifically, albeit framed in the context of the wider point that if the Beeb is acting commercially then its existence is pointless in the first place (which I’m sure most here agree with…).
The BBC is not a commercial enterprise,what freebies are buying is patronage pure and simple.Freebies to a producer for example,to get an artist on a show isn’t a commercial transaction but a distortion of the editorial process.
Read about the Payola scandal in America a few years back.
The issue here for most companies is now ‘reasonableness’. If a client visits your location, providing lunch is polite, if they stay overnight offering dinner is also OK, and if they are from a long distance then maybe a cultural event as well (Footie match to concert). However,a local supplier would, in our company not be provided with much in the way of hospitality since it would be seen as an inducement.
In addition we have a lot of contact with public bodies both government and non-government who generally have to be persuaded to accept lunch and usually insist in going Dutch over dinner.
Looks like a different set of ethics at the BBC.
“as they still frequently argue about it” –
of course they argue – senior bean-counters and corporate lawyers are employed for the specific purpose of arguing with HMRC. That’s not the same thing as saying there is anything to argue about.
“Honestly David, I pay you a compliment and this is how you react?”
Alex, exposing his sewer mind and then digging himself furiously into a bigger hole.
Honestly David, I pay you a compliment and this is how you react? Oh well, what did I expect? “Welcome sonny”? “Make yourself at home”? “Marry my daughter”?
Alex | Homepage | 14.05.08 – 3:14 pm |
Addressing the wrong person I’m afraid. try again.