BN66 - Round 2 (Court of Appeal)

[Cantthinkof1]

Totally confused ...

I have now started to get my Closure Notices through the post. They update my Self Assessment online, and then a few days later send out a corresponding Closure Notice. However, and this is where it gets confusing. Each time they complete their findings for a tax year and then update the Self Assessment account, it is changing the figures for the other tax years!!
I probably have not explained this very well, but would like to know if anyone else has found this too!! Obviously the CN's do not include interest, but the online account does, but the difference in the figures goes beyond that !!
I recently got a CN for tax year 03/04 which showed an amount of tax to pay. However as other tax year CN's have arrived, th net effect is that for tax year 03/04, all that is now showing for that year is an interest payment.
A 'knock on' effect is that my online SA statement is now showing tax owed for years that I was not in the scheme.
Just thinking that people with no access to their online account will find a real different story when their statement figures are shown!!
Is anyone else finding this!.

DR - I recall reading a posting from you where you said that your amounts were being shown as suspended? - that is not the case with me..

I have emailed NW to lodge the relevant appeals

All comments welcome

[DonkeyRhubarb]

DR - I recall reading a posting from you where you said that your amounts were being shown as suspended? - that is not the case with me..

I have emailed NW to lodge the relevant appeals

All comments welcome

The amounts won't show as "suspended" until your appeals have been accepted by HMRC.

I would leave it with NW to check everything. She has dealt with thousands of CNs now and she'll soon put things straight if HMRC have screwed up.

[Cantthinkof1]

The amounts won't show as "suspended" until your appeals have been accepted by HMRC.

I would leave it with NW to check everything. She has dealt with thousands of CNs now and she'll soon put things straight if HMRC have screwed up.

Many Thanks DR for the info - much appreciated...

[travellingknob]

HMRC response times

I received my CN's in two separate batches, the 1st in mid 2009 approx 2 years after I was first advised my returns were under investigation. Over the last year I have written a number of letters asking for mistakes to be corrected, asking for further information and also demanding to know on what basis my claim for DTA allowance was investigated and later refused. I have not had a single reply ! No, not one, no information, no corrections, no explanation.

Does anyone know if HMRC are obliged to respond within set timescales ?

This brings me to a question which I've seen many people ask but never a solid reply, what about interest ?

It is my position (and ours collectively I believe) that the law was changed in April 2008 and applied retrospectively such that tax not previously due suddenly became payable for previous years income. How then can HMRC charge interest from 31/1/xx of each year when in fact no tax was due until the year following the change in law - ie became law April 2008, tax due either 31/1/09 or 31/1/10 depending upon how you look at the tax year.

Not only is there interest, but HRMC calculate that you should make payments in advance. Interesting how they do that for each year when the law was not changed until 2008 !

Why am I writing this peice now ?

Well, if we ultimately loose the JR, loose in ECHR and have to pay up, I think its unlikely they will answer the question about interest (as its not yet part of the dispute).

I assume at some point we will get a firm Judgement whether infact the law was changed rather than 'clarified'. Depending upon that outcome would then give us the answer to what date interest could start accureing.

If the law was changed then interest can only accrue from some point after the law was introduced.

Does everyone agree ?

I wonder if HMRC would conceede this fact or whether we'd also be going to the commissioners on the issue of interest.

[Alba]

Interesting!

When is an agreement not an agreement? When it is with the tax man
DMH Stallard LLP

United Kingdom
March 4 2010
Getting your tax right can sometimes be complex and it is often the case that when HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) investigate a taxpayer, they find that there are irregularities. When these result in an underpayment of tax, HMRC will normally levy interest and/or a penalty on the taxpayer.

HMRC have discretion as to the amount of the penalty they can levy and where a taxpayer is fully cooperative and the underpayment is not regarded as an attempt to evade tax, a penalty may be waived altogether.

In a recent case, a man who controlled a partnership which had under-declared profits some years earlier faced an additional tax charge (plus statutory interest) of £122,000. He intended to appeal against HMRC’s decision, but wrote to the tax inspector prior to the court hearing making the following proposal: he would pay the additional tax, interest on the underpaid tax at the statutory rate and HMRC’s legal costs and, in consideration for his so doing, HMRC would withdraw its amendments to the relevant tax returns. This would remove the tax-geared penalty. The offer was made in the form of a formal offer to pay under Part 36 of the Civil Procedure Rules.

The man’s tax inspector wrote back, indicating that his offer would be accepted ‘without prejudice to any penalty determination which may follow hereafter’ and the taxpayer considered that once he had paid the agreed sum, that would be the end of the matter. However, a 70 per cent penalty notice (£54,000) followed, which was towards the upper end of the scale of penalties which are normally levied.

The taxpayer went to court to contest HMRC’s right to levy the penalty – and lost. The offer had not been sufficiently clear as regards the settlement of penalties and had not specifically dealt with them. Accordingly, HMRC were not bound to accept his offer as one which would remove their right to levy a tax-geared penalty.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

(1) Does anyone know if HMRC are obliged to respond within set timescales ?

(2) I assume at some point we will get a firm Judgement whether infact the law was changed rather than 'clarified'. Depending upon that outcome would then give us the answer to what date interest could start accureing.

If the law was changed then interest can only accrue from some point after the law was introduced.

Does everyone agree ?

(1) There may be some guidelines that they are supposed to comply with but I bet they don't take any notice. One thing which does seem to get a response is if you ask your Member of Parliament to complain to HMRC on your behalf.

(2) I think this is something the courts would have to consider as a separate issue. If it's ok to change the law retrospectively, is it also ok to charge retrospective interest? I doubt there is any existing legal precedent which addresses this.

[Emigre]

Budget 2010

Has anyone worked out where to obtain a copy of the Budget Notices?

I just heard Darling's party political broadcast. As ever, absolutely no detail, tax the Tory voters some more, spend it on NL voters. Can't understand why I thought it would be ok to set up my PSC in Belize...

The devil is in the detail

[Cosmo]

Has anyone worked out where to obtain a copy of the Budget Notices?

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/budget2010/index.htm

[Emigre]

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/budget2010/index.htm

Thanks Cosmo - can't wait to read it cover to cover

[PlaneSailing]

Has anyone worked out where to obtain a copy of the Budget Notices?

I just heard Darling's party political broadcast. As ever, absolutely no detail, tax the Tory voters some more, spend it on NL voters. Can't understand why I thought it would be ok to set up my PSC in Belize...

The devil is in the detail

Anti Avoidance - Earnings paid through Trusts or other entities
The Government will be taking action to prevent attempts to avoid tax and National Insurance contributions through the use of Employee Benefit Trusts and other arrangements to disguise payments of remuneration and intends to introduce anti-avoidance legislation to take effect from 6 April 2011.



So Mr Darling, why wasn't this made retrospective as is the
current expectation according to HMRC?