3D Force Ltd challenged the imposition of the training levy on three grounds, including that the company was not in the category of businesses subject to the levy; that the duty had not been calculated correctly; and that firms similar to 3D Force had not been subject to it.
The employment tribunal established that 3D Force’s installation and refurbishment of kitchens fell under the levy’s scope and qualified as an employer in the construction industry.
This is not a paywall. Registration allows us to enhance your experience across Construction Management and ensure we deliver you quality editorial content.
Registering also means you can manage your own CPDs, comments, newsletter sign-ups and privacy settings.
The tribunal also declared that the CITB levy calculations were correct and matched 3D Force’s declared figures.
In April 2024, CITB wrote to 3D Force requesting a levy payment of £5,147, which the company’s director, Marius-Stelian Domnisor, estimated was a significant proportion of the company’s profits at more than 6%.
The levy calculation was based on the figure declared by 3D Force to have been paid to subcontractors, which was £407,165. This amount was slightly over the £400,000 figure for companies to qualify for the CITB’s 50% reduction rate for small businesses.
In its appeal, 3D Force also argued that other companies in similar circumstances had not been subjected to the levy. However, the tribunal dismissed this ground as the case was focused on determining if the CITB levy rules applied to 3D Force, and not other businesses.
“It might well be that [CITB] is unaware of other companies to which these regulations might be applied, and so has taken no action against them, but that in our judgment is neither here nor there,” said the written judgment.
The employment tribunal noted that 3D Force was willing to enter conversations with CITB to pay the levy in instalments, a possibility which the tribunal encouraged.
