to not split the discount?

[schoolsaving]

Regular but NC as outing.

DS currently attends private school and fees split 50:50 with XH amicably but specific line 'school fees to be split 50:50' is in financial order. No maintenance paid as 50:50 care and clean break split with us i.e. no further claim on each other. Further relevant info is that since split I've reduced working hours and covered school holidays and XH has continued to work FT.

I've got a new full time job which includes 50% discount on school fees. Which of the below scenarios do you think is fairest?

A: fee discount reduces both our share and we split the cost of additional holiday childcare
B: fee discount reduces my share to nil and I pick up cost of additional holiday childcare
C: fee discount reduces my share to nil and we split additional holiday childcare

Thanks!

The spirit of it is very clear. You are still paying your 50% of the fees only now through a combination of labour and cash. It's a perk of your job, he wouldn't think to share a car or bonus or gym discount and I would push strongly not to share this. Legally this may mean a wording amendment, make sure it's not something that would need updating if you change jobs. Hopefully he recognises you do all the holiday care and this will just help make that financially easier for you ( given you want to keep that arrangement)

He'd be a granny dick (as that's what we are calling it) to pursue it. I would be pretty aggressive in pushing back on that unless I get full oversight of his employment perks and how he plans to share them.

*grabby!

I see it as salary sacrifice when she could earn more for the same job in a different setting, so therefore the entire discount is hers. If she worked in a different job she would earn more but have the school fees to pay so overall she is no better or worse off (and neither is the ex) if she takes the whole bonus, however she would be significantly worse (and him better) off compared to having a different job, if she shared it.

Based on made up numbers for simplicity

FT non school job = £50,000 p/a
FT school job = £40,000 + fees discoun p/a
Her share of fees = £10,000 p/a

Either way, OP's income afer fees = £40,000 p/a

His job = £50,000
Fees = £10,000

Income afer fees = £40,000

Sharing discount would leave the OP with £35,000 per year after fees, £5k less than if she took a non school job and paid the fees herself, and him with £45,000. She would in effect be paying 75% of the fees to his 25%

C - if he starts paying less abd then you change jobs will he be happy to then pay more?
If you work at topshop and get staff discount woukd he ecpect cheap clothes?
Does he give you half of his bonus?

The fees are split 50:50 how you pay tour half is up to you. For all anyine knowd you took that job specifically because you were struggling with fees.

Osolea yes it IS part of her salary, she will absolutely be paying tax and NI on it (HMRC rules).

N.B. If you want to understand why, Google 'benefits in kind'

@AHedgehogCanNeverBeBuggered

Taxed on the marginal cost of providing the school place, less financial contribution towards it? Potentially minimal tax liability.

A

Your thread title uses the phrase "split the discount" but the actual terms of you order are to split the fees. A subtle difference perhaps but it is the fee that needs to be split.

If the fee remains 100% and you are given vouchers or similar to cover your 50% then you are maintaining your agreement, but if the overall fee is reduced by 50% then the fees are 50% of what they previously were and going forward you would be splitting the new amount between the two of you.

Consider if the discount was 60% and you used the same sort of linguistic gymnastics some pp are using to claim that your 50% was therefore paid. To be logically consistent (ie. using the pre-discount amount to calculate each other's liability) your ex would still have to pay 50% of the original fee which would make the payment 10% over. Would that be yours? The schools? It can't be your ex's because that would mean he had only paid 40% and would have broken the agreement. What if the discount was 100%? Him paying half the pre-discount amount would be patently ridiculous because there would be no money due to anybody. That being the case it's obvious that the new, post-discount amount is what should be split.

Taxable benefit. So he would enjoy th benefit more than you if you share the discount.

You keep the discount it's perk of your job

In same way you doing every day time holiday care is perk of your job- he isn't bothered your earnings are reduced for only working 40 odd weeks a year. He's much better off not paying for care for his share or taking unpaid level. He can't pick n choose which benefits of your job he will be happy taking.

5Rivers unfortunately HMRC don't calculate the tax liability on the marginal cost but on the actual commercial value to the individual.

Basically their view is that if the school didn't offer the place to OP's child they would offer it to another child at full cost hence them calculating tax on the commercial rather than marginal value.

Lots of people giving personal opinions but not looking to the wording of the legal agreement and the employment contract.

School fees to be split 50:50

The school fees will be discounted by 50%, the total school fees will be 50% and so each would pay half of the new liability.

There is a valid point about OP being taxed on the benefit, however this will be minimal. There is case law on the subject, and the BIK is the marginal cost of providing the place for that child, not the average cost of a place. It is (for instance) the difference in cost between a class of 25 children and a class of 26 children.

unfortunately HMRC don't calculate the tax liability on the marginal cost but on the actual commercial value to the individual.

No, that's wrong.

Please look at Pepper v Hart for clarification.

Definitely C it is part of your salary package.
I hope exH can see it that way.

@AHedgehogCanNeverBeBuggered even if you work in the school? (which I was assuming given the high discount)

That's changed since I last did any tax!

Agree that they should only tax on marginal cost (Pepper v Hart). Which could be argued to be nil. (Not what OP needs help with but still!)

D) share the fees discount (but check the legalities first if it's a work benefit) as goodwill but make him stump up 50% of holiday childcare fees :)

If this is genuinely a taxable benefit in lieu of salary then what do staff without children get instead?

Museumum (sorry don't know how bold) it's likely not offered instead of salary, but as a tax efficient benefit should staff have children. It's a pretty good benefit after all. They may offer other benefits which could be taxable or non taxable to other staff.

I think you really need to take legal advice, as this thread shows it os open to interpretation.

I wouldn't go with A personally. This perk or job might not last forever, but while you do have it, it is because of your hard work and belongs to you.

But if he gets bonuses he has to share that ......