I'd try arguing that the situation is unfair. Why should drivers get paid
more of their expenses than cyclists?
Also, does the organisation have any environment policies? If so, they
should be promoting cycling and deterring driving, not making cyclists pay
more than drivers. Surely a case for paying the full HMRC rate for cycling.
-----Original Message-----
From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Peter R.H. Wood
Sent: 16 September 2011 12:13
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Bicycle Mileage
Hiya,
I'm trying to work out claiming bike mileage for my fieldwork, and for-work
travel. Currently I can claim 12p a mile by bike, or 38.5 by car.
HMRC guidance [www.hmrc.gov.uk/rates/travel.htm] says that you can claim
back from tax up to 20p for bikes or 45p in cars. Except I don't pay tax,
because it's a stipend. So me cycling gets 60% of the HMRC rate, and drivers
get 85%.
Finance dept has said that this rate is set in negotiations between HR and
the Unions: "The car mileage rates are more likely to rise as the cost of
driving is increasing rapidly, whilst the cost of cycling does not vary
significantly. Neither car nor bicycle rates are as high as the HMRC
approved mileage rates.
I am not sure to whom you would need to make a case to get the rates
increased, but I would imagine that you would have to demonstrate that the
cost of cycling has increased, which I imagine would be difficult to do."
Primarily, does anyone know how I can make a case that the cost of cycling
has increased recently?
Secondly, does anyone have any other relevant and previously successful
arguments in situations like this? (I did mention that their own travel plan
recommends encouraging cycling for institutional reasons, that people who
cycle are on average more productive per hour, ill less, and that
encouraging cycling will mean marginal cost savings vs paying fully double
the price for car drivers. No response on that regard.)
Best,
Pete
|