BN66 - Round 2 (Court of Appeal)

[centurian]

If we win, I hope HMRC heads roll for this.

Highly unlikely. Even if HMRC lose, they will spin it their way - how the "rich" are able to afford the best lawyers to "dodge their taxes" - and how they need extra powers, extra laws to clamp down harder etc.

[ALMAC]

Closure notice

Can anyone advise me if HMRC can issue a closure notice for a year where no investigation was opened.

I am talking about the year 2002/2003.

As per all other years my tax return detailed which relief that I was claiming so I can't see how they can use "discovery" as an excuse.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Can anyone advise me if HMRC can issue a closure notice for a year where no investigation was opened.

I am talking about the year 2002/2003.

As per all other years my tax return detailed which relief that I was claiming so I can't see how they can use "discovery" as an excuse.

It is Montpelier's contention that HMRC are not permitted to do this.

Where this has occurred, Montpelier have cited different grounds for appeal of the closure notice.

Ultimately this would have to be decided at a tax tribunal.

[ALMAC]

Closure notice

For this particular item I don't know if I can wait till then as it makes the difference between bankruptcy and a normal life.

Should I just take a stance against HMRC as Montpelier don't seem to be showing any interest. Perhaps they have nothing to gain in this particular loss which seems to affect me and not them.

[ALMAC]

Has anyone else out there been affected by this. I.E closure notices against years with no investigation. I would be really interested to know. Montpelier seem to be offering no advice or help on this.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

There are 2 scenarios where Montpelier believe HMRC have breached the rules:

1) Enquiries opened, under discovery, after the 12 month window eg. for tax year 2002/3, enquiries opened after 31st Jan 2005

2) Closure notices issued where no prior enquiry was opened

There are a significant number of people affected by (1), less so by (2).

Montpelier have appealed all these CNs on the basis that HMRC have not complied with the rules, in contrast to the normal appeals based on Human Rights.

If the higher law courts allow BN66 to stand then HMRC would still have to take these appeals through the lower tax courts and prove their case before they could enforce collection.

Does that reassure you?

[Morlock]

There are 2 scenarios where Montpelier believe HMRC have breached the rules:

1) Enquiries opened, under discovery, after the 12 month window eg. for tax year 2002/3, enquiries opened after 31st Jan 2005

2) Closure notices issued where no prior enquiry was opened

There are a significant number of people affected by (1), less so by (2).

Montpelier have appealed all these CNs on the basis that HMRC have not complied with the rules, in contrast to the normal appeals based on Human Rights.

If the higher law courts allow BN66 to stand then HMRC would still have to take these appeals through the lower tax courts and prove their case before they could enforce collection.

Does that reassure you?

And correct me if I'm wrong, but I think HMRC will need to show that significant new information had been brought to their attention in order to justify use of their "discovery" protocol..?

[DonkeyRhubarb]

And correct me if I'm wrong, but I think HMRC will need to show that significant new information had been brought to their attention in order to justify use of their "discovery" protocol..?

Indeed.

The rules allow them to take up to a year after a return has been filed to open an enquiry. The claim to tax relief under the DTA was fully disclosed, and it's not the taxpayer's fault if they were incompetent.

[BarneyCool]

This is a nightmare. Without a decision, our lives and plans have to be held in check. If we win, I hope HMRC heads roll for this. At least they are giving our case plenty of thought. Whatever comes out of this, I think we'll be a lot clearer about the final outcome. I hope so anyway.

Does anyone know if there is actually a time limit on when they have to provide a decision by?

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Does anyone know if there is actually a time limit on when they have to provide a decision by?

As far as I'm aware, there is no set time limit.

At 8 months, we're already into exceptional territory.

Only a handful, of the 2000-odd cases they hear each year, go over 12 months.