Why you can never trust HMRC even to know the law!

dori2o · 22 June 2017 at 7:50AM

bob_bank_spanker wrote: »

The tribunal (linked above) findings are pretty damning. HMRC fail to provide any evidence they sent a notice to file. I think we can all assume (as the tribunal did) no such notice was sent. They then relied on the useless gov.uk website as evidence that self assessment was required.

https://www.gov.uk/running-a-limited-company/directors-responsibilities

That advice is still (!) there. The tribunal made it clear it has no basis in law. Why does nobody take ownership of this?

Part of the problem stems from the fact that HMRC don't own the content on the Gov.UK website. It therefore takes time to get changes made.

zagfles · 22 June 2017 at 7:58AM

realaledrinker wrote: »

Not helped by a self assessment submission process that omits even the most obvious checks. If I claim pension contributions for a higher rate taxpayer in excess of salary, then not only does the submission software not flag this up as incorrect, the taxpayers tax code is increased as a result!

To a RAS scheme (eg personal pension/SIPP etc) presumably? If so it's working correctly.

You get your basic rate band extended to give higher rate relief, and that's normally reflected in the tax code.

You are allowed to contribute over 100% of salary to a pension, but aren't entitled to tax relief on the excess. This is something you need to tell the scheme, so they don't claim tax relief on that portion.

chrismac1 · 22 June 2017 at 10:11AM

"Part of the problem stems from the fact that HMRC don't own the content on the Gov.UK website. It therefore takes time to get changes made"

Sorry that may explain recent incorrect information, but much of the made-up stuff on Gov.uk - including this particular piece of drivel about directors' tax returns - was simply copied and pasted from the HMRC website when it moved to Gov.uk.

dori2o · 22 June 2017 at 10:27AM

chrismac1 wrote: »

"Part of the problem stems from the fact that HMRC don't own the content on the Gov.UK website. It therefore takes time to get changes made"

Sorry that may explain recent incorrect information, but much of the made-up stuff on Gov.uk - including this particular piece of drivel about directors' tax returns - was simply copied and pasted from the HMRC website when it moved to Gov.uk.

I never said any different did I. I merely made a statement of fact.

dori2o · 22 June 2017 at 6:01PM

Having had the chance to sit down and read the decision I have to say that both the OP and the terrible article linked within it are both laying it on very very thick with regards to what the actual decision was.

To read the OP and the linked article you'd have thought that this was some huge new ruling that was going to change the way tax is administered in the UK.

In fact the issue about company directors gets less than 4 lines in the whole document, and is irrelevant to the final decision.

The Late filing and daily penalties were not quashed because of the issue regarding the taxpayer being a company director and whether there was any reliance on him to file a return voluntarily.

In fact the reason why the penalty appeal was successful at the tribunal was that the person/people who were there on HMRC's behalf could not verify which address the S316 (notice to file) was issued to, neither could they verify where the £100 late filing penalty notification was issued to, and as the taxpayer stated they had never received the notice then it was deemed it was not served, thus provding that the taxpayer had a reasonable excuse for not submitting their tax return on time.

No more to see here. Just the usual I Hate HMRC drivel we've seen from the same poster time, after time, after time.

chrismac1 · 23 June 2017 at 5:05AM

I don't hate HMRC. Well no more than I have little time for incompetent people in general who point the finger at everyone else, as with the ridiculous mess at Grenfell Towers where that approach cost lives not just money. So apart from not following the law in this case, HMRC could not send out letters and penalty notices properly. But still took the case to Tribunal.

That's all right then. Hopefully all the people reading this are suitably reassured at the capabilities and competence of HMRC now.

badmemory · 23 June 2017 at 6:13PM

dori2o wrote: »

Just the usual I Hate HMRC drivel we've seen from the same poster time, after time, after time.

Unfortunately, it is much worse than I hate HMRC, it is I don't trust HMRC. After all no-one loves a tax collector, that has been true for over 2k years. But trust is quite different & seems to have decreased over the last 20 years.

Whilst I have every respect for what you do on here & your knowledge & I am pleased to see you back, my interactions with HMRC over the last few years have not been inspiring.

In summary - call to say starting taking state pension whilst working - receive new tax code - not low enough - another call saying that - another code - taking too much (this is simple maths not rocket science) - I say taking too much this time - you will have to do self assessment then. So being punished for disagreeing.

Latest is a letter saying no longer have to do SA as they get info direct from DWP (which HMRC have had for years). I will be monitoring and have checked that I can go back to SA if I wish. It is about trust.

If you can convince them to bring in a new (I think would have to be voluntary) code that can take more than half your income in tax I would be extremely grateful (and HMRC would get their tax at least 9 months earlier) & I could take my rubbish personal pension.

polymaff · 25 June 2017 at 7:58PM

As Stanley Baldwin wrote of the press barons 80 years ago:

"power without responsibility – the prerogative of the harlot throughout the ages"

Wayne_O_Mac · 26 June 2017 at 9:14PM

polymaff wrote: »

As Stanley Baldwin wrote of the press barons 80 years ago:

"power without responsibility – the prerogative of the harlot throughout the ages"

Baldwin was an !!!!!! even by Tory standards, he's safely ignored.

dori2o · 28 June 2017 at 11:22PM

badmemory wrote: »

Unfortunately, it is much worse than I hate HMRC, it is I don't trust HMRC. After all no-one loves a tax collector, that has been true for over 2k years. But trust is quite different & seems to have decreased over the last 20 years.

Whilst I have every respect for what you do on here & your knowledge & I am pleased to see you back, my interactions with HMRC over the last few years have not been inspiring.

In summary - call to say starting taking state pension whilst working - receive new tax code - not low enough - another call saying that - another code - taking too much (this is simple maths not rocket science) - I say taking too much this time - you will have to do self assessment then. So being punished for disagreeing.

Latest is a letter saying no longer have to do SA as they get info direct from DWP (which HMRC have had for years). I will be monitoring and have checked that I can go back to SA if I wish. It is about trust.

If you can convince them to bring in a new (I think would have to be voluntary) code that can take more than half your income in tax I would be extremely grateful (and HMRC would get their tax at least 9 months earlier) & I could take my rubbish personal pension.

Its completely and utterly pointless pointing the finger at HMRC for the rules regarding the collection of tax.

I've said it umpteen times on here that HMRC do not write the rules regarding tax or the collection of it.

All tax laws, including the PAYE regulations which is what prevents collection of more than 50% of your income on a K-code are created/written by HM Treasury.

HMRC are the collectors of tax, nothing more, nothing less.

For everything else to do with tax laws etc it's HMT who dictate the rules.

Why you can never trust HMRC even to know the law!

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free