Client on HB....non-dep. son has a job away from normal home Mon-Fri but returns over weekend...Probably Fri. evening. His employers are paying for weekday accommodation.. he moves around the country staying in B+Bs... Should NDD still be applied? It looks a grey area...is there any helpful case law for the HB claimant.....thank you

Home address is his permanent residence - the majority of his personal possessions are there - whether he chooses to stay and work away from home is immaterial - we had one of these a couple of years ago and that was the outcome......

I agree with Mike. An easy analogy (at least for me) is that I often work away from home and spend 4/5 nights in B & B. Don't think anyone would doubt for one moment that my "sole or main residence" is the address I'm at during weekends.

If your client's son had his own place AS WELL, and simply stayed some weekends with his parents, that would be different. But based on the info given, it seems pretty clear that the parent's address is the non-dep's "main" residence and therefore a non-dep deduction should be made.

Just a thought - could either of his parents get DLA (care) or Att Allowance? That would resolve any non-dep issues instantly.

Regards

It is impotant not to conflate "sole or main residence" (taken from CTAX legislation) with "normally resides with", the HB defintion of a non dependant. Dont forget that in CTAX there is a hierarchy of those who are liable, starting with owner occupiers and ending with licencees or even ultimately squatters

"Normally resides with" has more intimate connotations, and also connotations of permanence (see CIS14850/1996)

I would also sugggest that it has connotations of sharing at least some household responsibilities. If you want to develop an argument about "residing with" along these lines I think you will find some mileage in CIS671/1992 where the Commissioner discusses the concept of a household in its broader sense.