Home
Subscriptions
DASH Flex
E-bikes
Bikes
Clothing
Accessories
FAQs
Fleets
The below is our view, not legal, tax or accounting advice and should not be relied upon as such.
The Qualifying Journey is the central concept of the Cycle to Work scheme, but it is regularly misunderstood. The most common shorthand, "the commute", is materially incomplete under HMRC's operative definition. That definition is meaningfully broader than the shorthand suggests, and illuminating it properly opens the scheme to the participants the shorthand has historically overlooked.
This article sets out where the HMRC definition comes from, what the test requires, and how that test can apply to the working patterns that now characterise modern UK employment.
The starting point is Section 244 ITEPA 2003, which gives the cycle exemption. Section 244 imposes three conditions, the most relevant of which here (Condition B) is that the employee uses the cycle mainly for "qualifying journeys". The section itself does not define that phrase, and the operative meaning is drawn from HMRC's published guidance in the Employment Income Manual.
EIM21664, which sets out the cycle exemption, states that the meaning of "qualifying journeys" for a cycle is the same as for the works bus exemption, and directs the reader to EIM21850.
EIM21850 contains the fullest exposition of what qualifying journeys cover. They are: journeys between home and a workplace; journeys between workplaces; and, materially, journeys made on a working day between the workplace and shops or other amenities, where the distance is no more than 10 miles one-way (20 miles return). As long as the cycle is used mainly for journeys of these kinds, Condition B is satisfied.
A short word on what "workplace" means, because the qualifying journey definition turns on it. HMRC's working definition is that a workplace is a place at which the employee's attendance is necessary in the performance of the duties of the employment. For most employees this is an obvious physical location: an office, a shop, a factory, a depot.
For a fully remote employee whose role is contractually structured as remote, our view is that home will typically meet that test. The duties of the employment are performed there, the employer's arrangements do not provide an alternative place at which attendance is required, and there is no element of optionality in the arrangement.
EIM21850 sets out three categories of qualifying journey.
First, journeys between home and the workplace. This extends to journeys completed only partly by bike. A multi-stage commute, for example cycling to the station, taking the train, and possibly cycling again from the destination station to the workplace, is within the definition. The bike need not perform the whole commute to count.
Second, journeys between workplaces. This covers travel from one place of work to another.
Third, journeys on a working day between the workplace and shops or other amenities, where the distance is no more than ten miles one-way (twenty miles for the round trip). This is the lunchtime, or amenity, category. It carries two limits that must be observed together: a distance limit (ten miles one-way) and a temporal limit (it applies only on working days). A ride to the shops on a non-working day does not benefit from this category.
The amenity category is the one most often overlooked when people summarise EIM21850, and under it the Qualifying Journey is not confined to the commute; it reaches the working-day errand to nearby amenities as well.
Condition B requires that the cycle be used mainly for Qualifying Journeys. It does not require exclusivity.
The threshold is "main use", which is to say more than fifty per cent of use. It is a practical test rather than a perfect one. Pleasure use, family use, and other non-qualifying uses do not disqualify the exemption if they are not the main use of the cycle. A person who commutes by bicycle on weekdays and rides the same bicycle for leisure at the weekend has not thereby forfeited anything: leisure riding is simply another use, and other use is permitted up to the point at which it becomes the main use.
Two further refinements are essential.
First, the test is applied to actual usage during the hire period, not to the employee's stated intentions at the outset. What matters is how the cycle is used over the life of the arrangement, not what the employee declared, hoped, or anticipated when they joined the scheme.
Second, a change of circumstances partway through the hire does not retroactively disqualify the exemption, because the test is concerned with actual use over the period the employee held the cycle. A stolen bike is a useful illustration. The theft itself is almost beside the point. What matters is how the cycle was used up to the moment it was stolen, while it was available for use. If it was used mainly for Qualifying Journeys during the period the employee had it, the condition was satisfied and the exemption is unaffected. Similarly, a cycle that is used compliantly for six months and then sits in the shed unused for the remainder of the hire is not non-compliant. The bike sitting unused does not disturb the main-use position established by the prior period.
The definition was created when traditional commuting was more common, but the legal test still applies regardless of changing trends in working patterns. The rise of remote and hybrid working changes the practical content of the phrase "between home and workplace", but it does not change the test itself. This distinction matters for applying the rules to the working lives people actually lead today.
Three representative cases illustrate the point.
The employee who travels to an office five days a week is the case for which the commuting category was written, and it presents no difficulty. The daily journey between home and the workplace is a Qualifying Journey of the first category. Provided commuting represents the main use of the cycle, Condition B is satisfied. Leisure riding is permissible as other use and does not threaten the position.
The employee who works solely from home, within the United Kingdom, and who does not commute to an office at all is sometimes assumed to be incapable of satisfying the Qualifying Journeys condition, on the reasoning that without a commute there can be no Qualifying Journey. On reading EIM21850, that reasoning is mistaken.
Where the employee's home is itself a workplace under their employment arrangements (as discussed above), journeys from that home/workplace on a working day fall within the Qualifying Journey rules in the same way as journeys from an office. The third category is the relevant one: a journey on a bike on a working day from the employee's workplace (which is the home) to shops or other amenities can qualify, provided it falls within the distance limit of ten miles one-way. A worker whose home is their workplace, and who cycles to local amenities during the working day, is on the proper reading making Qualifying Journeys.
The employee who attends an office on some days and works from home on others sits between the two preceding cases. The office is a workplace. Journeys between home and the office on office-working days are Qualifying Journeys of the first category, and working-day rides from the office to local amenities within ten miles can qualify under the third category. Rides from home on home-working days are only Qualifying Journeys if home is also a workplace for the hybrid employee. Failing this, those rides fall within the permitted other-use headroom provided the main use test is met.
Section 244 ITEPA 2003 gives the cycle exemption and requires the bike to be used mainly for "qualifying journeys". The operative meaning is set out in HMRC's published guidance, where EIM21664 reads across to the works bus framework at EIM21850 for the fullest exposition of the term.
A Qualifying Journey covers journeys between home and a workplace (including those completed only partly by bike), journeys between workplaces, and working-day journeys to shops or amenities within ten miles one way. The governing requirement is that the cycle be used mainly (more than half the time) for such journeys, judged by actual use across the hire period rather than by stated intention. It is not undone by a change of circumstances along the way.
Reading EIM21850, the Qualifying Journeys condition is meaningfully more accommodating than its abbreviated reputation suggests. It does not demand exclusivity, it does not demand a conventional commute, and it does not penalise the leisure rider or the home worker. It asks only that the cycle's main use, in fact, be a qualifying one.
References:
HM Government (2003) Income Tax (Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003, section 244. Available at: legislation.gov.uk
HM Revenue & Customs (n.d.) EIM21664 - Employment Income Manual: Cycle to Work schemes. Available at: GOV.UK HMRC Employment Income Manual EIM21664
HM Revenue & Customs (n.d.) EIM21850 - Employment Income Manual: Cycle to Work schemes. Available at: GOV.UK HMRC Employment Income Manual EIM21850
