HMRC has guidelines about how long you have to work at a customer site before it is considered to be a fixed site like this. They have to do this because it informs tax decisions about travel expense claims.
I think the guideline is that after two years, the site should then not be eligible for travel expenses. Nearby sites are also not eligible - where the definition of nearby relates to how similar are the journeys taken to reach each site.
Whilst HMRC clearly aren't the branch of government that are involved in this ruling, this is a similar structure around which such an argument could be made.
IANAL, but in the US, if you are a consultant going to a customer, whether or not that is billable is up to your contract. Either way, you definitely CAN claim travel expenses during that period for tax purposes.
I've been wondering that, since I'm in the same situation. But, in my personal situation, our contracts are generally for longer terms, so I guess it is a fixed office - and we have a fixed HQ too. Which we don't generally visit during our workdays though.
Even if it would apply to consultants though, I doubt anything would change. Right now there's already laws in place here (NL), or just a company agreement, about longer commutes, iirc any commute longer than an hour can be written down as working hours.
But, in my personal situation, our contracts are generally for longer terms, so I guess it is a fixed office - and we have a fixed HQ too.
The issue is that you have no control over the location of these changing "fixed" offices, so your employer is free to assign you to a customer halfway across the country. Sounds exactly like the kind of situation this ruling is supposed to protect against.
I don't know the generics, but this applies to employees in Italy. That rules consultants out from the catch all national contracts unless especially agreed upon beforehand.
