Leo said:
What it seems to be saying is that, regarding income, I need to file a
return only if my non-salary income takes me into a different tax band
(ie above £36,000 or, below £2320). Otherwise I don't bother.
Yes, or if you have other income which has not had tax deducted at
source, for example if you write anything and the publisher pays
you a fee.
But re: expenses, I've been told that the the criteria is "wholly,
exclusively and necessarily" (or something like that),
That's correct for employment income. If you were self-employed,
the "necessarily" part would be omitted. Bummer.
which means
that nothing I spend qualifies because it's not "necessarily".
It's not a simple as that. I suspect you are imposing a stricter
interpretation on "necessary" than is, er, necessary.
For
example, I go to a conference. I apply for funding to go (I'm an
academic) but don't get it. I go anyway, because if I don't go to
conferences I might as well kiss my career good-bye. It's wholly and
exclusively part of my job, but since I wouldn't lose my job if I
didn't go, it's not necessary and so not an expense.
This is a difficult one. It's not even certain that going to a
conference is part of your job at all, so in this case even the
"wholly and exclusively" tests are likely not satisfied, and so
there isn't even any point in wondering about the "necessarily" test.
It's important also to distinguish between your actual job on the
one hand, and your career on the other. Your career will span
several jobs, and any expense incurred mainly for the purpose of
furthering your career prospects is really of more benefit to you
long-term than it is to your current short-term duties.
If what you expect to learn at the conference is directly relevant
to the research you are doing now, or if you are even contributing
even is a small way to the conference, the expense may well qualify.
But if your attendance is more for "networking" to benefit your
future employability, it probably will not.
Same with
computer software (I can always use an pencil and paper - but I can't
claim for pencil and paper, because I should really just memorise the
data), books and journal subscriptions (no-one's forcing me to read
them, and if I really want to read them I can go to a library),
membership of professional bodies (not necessary for the job itself),
etc.
This is where you're going too far. Membership of professional bodies
generally *is* an allowable expense, including journal subscriptions.
Most people don't claim for pencil and paper because it's too trivial
(but I dare say most academics don't actually buy their own pecils and
paper, but have them supplied free of charge by their employers).
Likewise computers are generally supplied for your use, and you're not
expected to pay for them.
If there is a particular item of computer software which is necessary to
help you carry out your duties more effectively or efficiently, I reckon
it would generally pass the "necessarily" test. But what would count as
evidence that it is indeed "necessary to help you ..."? It may well be
the fact that the cost is reimbursed by your employer. If you buy it
yourself, it may not be as necessary as all that. If it makes you more
efficient, you will have more time to do something else. What will you
do with that time? Go surfing? Then the expense would really have been
incurred for your private benefit.