Taxation logo taxation mission text

Since 1927 the leading authority on tax law, practice and administration

A grand design

14 September 2010
Issue: 4272 / Categories: Forum & Feedback , Pepper v Hart , Stones v Hall
A limited company trades as an interior design business. Instead of having its own showroom, it uses the director’s private residence to display designs including lighting systems, designer furniture, etc

I have taken on as a client a new small limited company that trades as an interior designer. There is a rented office near the shareholder/director’s home but no separate showroom.

Instead the company has spent some £20 000 on improvements to the director’s house incorporating some of the interior designs – such as a computer-controlled lighting system as well as designer furniture joinery and a deluxe bathroom.

Customers are taken round the house to see these design ideas in practice. The overall effect is better than a showroom as it is a real house.

Business has grown considerably and the director is certain that this is due in no small part to the house acting as a ‘super showroom’.

However no advice seems to have been taken before incurring the expenditure and the result seems to be something of a potential minefield of benefits in...

If you or your firm subscribes to Taxation.co.uk, please click the login box below:

If you are not a subscriber but are a registered user or have a free trial, please enter your details in the following boxes:

Alternatively, you can register free of charge to read a limited amount of subscriber content per month.
Once you have registered, you will receive an email directing you back to read this item in full.

Please reach out to customer services at +44 (0) 330 161 1234 or 'customer.services@lexisnexis.co.uk' for further assistance.

back to top icon