Originally posted by philinlondon
View Post
Further, HMRC writing to one, or one dozen or one hundred people does NOT set precedent. HMRC is very definitely NOT obliged to agree to treat all people the same and will use a range of excuses (rogue officer going off piste, acting in breach if policy, no policy yet as terms of review not set) to claim no precedent.
I'm not a lawyer and may have the next bit wrong (apologies) but the rules on estoppel say that where an action or set of actions have become the norm and are accepted by both parties as being so, then even if the law if at variance with that convention, it will apply. This was tested in the CoA recently where HMRC and an agent acted as though an enquiry had been opened when in fact the delivery of enquiry notice had not happened. It was held that for some matters (in this case opening an enquiry), estoppel could not apply if the initiating notice was absent. The taxpayer won. Here, that same principle might apply.
The speculation around LC review meaning suspension of settlement, postponement of disclosure deadlines, time to pay agreements, APN liability is just that - speculation.
Please, please wait until something more meaningful and substantial than Twitter carries news before setting off into the sunset.
Please, please also remember that even if the the LC disappears forever, all open years (see above) remain under enquiry and will need to be agreed. If HMRC does emerge from the LC review bruised and battered (and frankly they should because they have handled these matters appallingly badly) do we think that their last remaining hope of salvaging credibility - pursuing those enquiries they have opened - will be abandoned?
You would be brave to believe that.
Comment