Private ruling: Work related expenses - home office v place of business
Published: July 2012
Ruling period: Year ended 30 June 2010 | Year ended 30 June 2011
Date scheme commenced: 1 July 2009

Ruling: Q1: Is your home office considered a place of business? | A1: No

Relevant facts and circumstances: You were an employee. In your home you have set up a room as an office which was used exclusively for the completion of work activities. Your employer provided a computer for work use, however all other equipment and furniture has been provided by you to set up your office. Your home office is not suitable or readily adaptable for private or domestic use. Contact with overseas clients was generally completed outside of normal office hours due to time zone differences. These activities were generally completed from your home office. There was no mention in your employment contract of the expectation by your employer to work from home. There were no restrictions placed on you in terms of access to your employer's office. There was no security guard stationed permanently at the employer's office premises.

Relevant legislative provisions: Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 section 8-1

Reasons for decision: Summary: Section 8-1 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (ITAA 1997) allows a deduction for all losses and outgoings to the extent to which they are incurred in gaining or producing assessable income except where the outgoings are of a capital, private or domestic nature, or relate to the earning of exempt income or a provision of the taxation legislation excludes it. Taxation Ruling TR 93/30 sets out the Commissioner's views concerning the deductibility of home office expenses. The deductibility of particular expenses depends upon whether the home can be characterised as a 'place of business.' Where a home is a place of business, a taxpayer may be able to claim some or all of the following 'occupancy' and 'running' expenses: Occupancy expenses: Expenses relating to ownership or use of a home which are not affected by the taxpayer's income earning activities These include rent, mortgage interest, municipal and water rates and house insurance premiums. Running expenses: Expenses relating to the use of facilities within the home. These include electricity charges for heating/cooling, lighting, cleaning costs, depreciation, leasing charges and the cost of repairs on items of furniture and furnishings in the office. Where the home cannot be characterised as a place of business, the occupancy expenses cannot be claimed as a tax deduction. Where the home is nevertheless used for the production of assessable income, a deduction may be allowable for the running expenses. Paragraph 5 of TR 93/30 lists some of the factors which may indicate that a part of a home has the character of a 'place of business'. These are that: · the area is clearly identifiable as a place of business; · the area is not readily suitable or adaptable for use for private or domestic purposes in association with the home generally; · the area is used exclusively or almost exclusively for carrying on a business; or · the area is used regularly for visits of clients or customers. The existence of any of these factors or a combination of them will not necessarily be conclusive in ascertaining the character of an area used as a home office. Rather the decision in each case will depend on whether, on a balanced consideration of the essential character of the area, the nature of the taxpayer's business and any other relevant factors, the area constitutes a -place of business- in the ordinary and common sense meaning of the term. In Handley v FC of T 81 ATC 4165 the taxpayer was a barrister who purchased a home in 1969 as a family residence. One reason for purchasing the property was that it contained a room which the taxpayer considered would be suitable to use as his study. He used this room principally as a study and worked in it for 20 hours per week, 45 weeks of the year. In 1972, 1973 and 1974 the taxpayer claimed a proportion of the mortgage interest, council rates, taxes and insurance premiums as deductions attributable to the room used as a study. The majority of judges held that the expenses claimed were of a capital, private or domestic nature. Although the study was predominantly used for the purpose of the taxpayer's profession it remained an integral part of his home. The payments did not have the character of outgoings incurred in gaining or producing assessable income nor were they necessarily incurred in carrying on the taxpayer's profession. The High Court dismissed the appeals. It is difficult for an employee to establish that their home is a 'place of business'. This is because the employee is not conducting a business in their own right and is usually provided with a place of work by their employer. In many cases, an employee may only choose to work at home at given times as a matter of convenience. However, as stated in paragraph 12 of TR 93/30: 'The absence of an alternative place for conducting income producing activities has also influenced a court or tribunal to accept a part of a taxpayer's residence as a place of business. The courts supported this view in Swinford v FC of T (1984) 15 ATR 1154; 84 ATC 4803 where a self employed script writer used one room of a flat for writing purposes and for meetings with television station staff. In addition, Case F53 74 ATC 294 concerned an employee architect conducting a small private practice from home, while Case T48 86 ATC 389 concerned a country sales manager for an oil company whose employer did not provide him with a place to work . In each of these cases the taxpayer was able to show that, as a matter of fact, there was no alternative place of business, it was necessary to work from home, and that the room in question was used exclusively or almost exclusively for income producing purposes. Based on the findings in these cases, it is considered that, for employees a place of business will exist only if: · it is a requirement inherent in the nature of the taxpayer's activities that the taxpayer needs a place of business; · the taxpayer's circumstances are such that there is no alternative place of business and it was necessary to work from home; and · the area of the home is used exclusively or almost exclusively for income producing purposes. In your case the Commissioner does not consider you to be conducting a business from your home. You are performing employee related duties from home. We also consider that your home office is merely a 'private study' and as a result, deductions should be limited to your additional 'running expenses'. In order to show that the room in your home is a place of business you have to satisfy the conditions above. We consider that you do not meet the above conditions because: 1. The nature of your work does not in itself require you to work from home. Your employer has a place of business where you are able to perform the duties you perform at home. You have full access to the office at any time, inside or outside of normal working hours. Whilst it is acknowledged that you may feel safer working from home after normal office hours, this does not convert your home to a place of business. You have an alternative place of business to conduct your duties. There is no specific reason why it is it is necessary for you to work from home. There is no mention of the expectation that you work from home in your employment contract. We acknowledge that you may use the home office exclusively for income producing purposes, however as the other two requirements are not met, the room in your house cannot be considered a place of business. As your home office is not considered a place of business, you will not be entitled to a deduction for occupancy costs.

Please check this edited version to be sure that there are no details remaining that you think may allow you to be identified. If you have any concerns about this ruling you wish to discuss, you will find our contact details in the fact sheet.