23 May 2019
Grain Farmer Sows Seeds of Hope for Capital Allowances for Grain Silos

Capital Allowances are a form of tax relief that can be claimed by traders when they incur expenditure on “plant and machinery”. They can be deducted from the tax adjusted profit for the accounting period, thereby reducing the taxable trading profit.
However, the definition of what constitutes “plant and machinery” is a contentious issue and one that is discussed in a significant amount of case law.
The case law, along with the Capital Allowances Act 2001 and HMRC practice, suggests that an asset qualifies as “plant” if it has an expected life of two years or more and has a clear function in enabling the activities of the business to take place.
Buildings and a number of other structures are specifically excluded from the definition of “plant”. However, there are named exceptions that are allowable, such as “silos provided for temporary storage”, “caravans provided mainly for holiday lettings” and the “provision of fish tanks or fish ponds.”
The case of Stephen May v HMRC (2019) is an example of a “plant and machinery” debate. Here, the First-Tier Tribunal held that the construction of a facility for the purposes of drying, conditioning and storing grain by a farmer is in fact eligible for Capital Allowances, despite HMRC’s claim that the facility is a “building.”
The Facts
- The farmer, Stephen May, produces grain to sell to local farms and feed mills.
- In order to dry and condition the grain that he grows after it is harvested and store it until it is sold, Stephen decided to have a facility constructed on his land.
- Stephen claimed Capital Allowances for “Plant and Machinery” for the construction of the facility in the tax returns for the business.
- HMRC enquired into the tax returns and concluded that although some of the items in the facility were eligible for relief, the facility was itself a “building” and therefore only a proportion of the Capital Allowances claimed by Stephen would be allowable.