tax office say we owe them money 4 years on

jimmo

To me, this thread has all the hallmarks of the gulf between those who earn their living dealing with tax matters and people like sunrise27 who unwittingly get dragged into the tax red tape. It sometimes seems that we talk different forms of English but, with a bit of perseverance, we can find a way through.
Sunrise27, my interpretation of what you say is that in 2006/07 your husband started the tax year driving a company car which was a BMW with a list price of £21,185 but in July 2006 his company car changed to a Jaguar with a list price of £29,791.
Speaking as a former taxman, I would have expected that to cause tax problems for your husband for 2006/07 but you haven't mentioned such a problem.
Hopefully, from your point of view, HMRC have had to forgo any underpayment for 2006/07 because that year is now "out of date" under the relatively new 4 year time limit.
Moving on to your particular problem year, 2007/08, I find it very easy to believe that your husband's 2007/08 coding started out on the basis that your husband was still driving the BMW and he was underpaying tax from day 1.
I also see that he ceased to use a company car in Feb 2008 but, as far as I can tell at present, that may affect the amount of the underpayment but it does not affect the principle that your husband has an underpayment cause by the upgrade of company car.
Having said that there does seem to be something seriously wrong if HMRC have suddenly, out of the blue, notified your husband of a 2007/08 underpayment now. From your point of view that is completely unacceptable but you may need to be wary that HMRC have been writing to your husband over the years and he has binned the letters. Unlikely maybe, but possible.
Also, quite frankly, you have to take account of human nature. When you phone HMRC you will probably speak to a person who is earning marginally above National Minimum Wage and dreams of, one day, driving a Jaguar. I still dream of that.
In my time at HMRC I had a lot of sympathy for poor pensioners who fell foul of the tax system and I bent the rules but, even going back 30 plus years I would have regarded a Jaguar driver who bleated about a £350 tax bill as a con merchant or chancer.
I would suggest that your chances of getting the £350 underpayment written off will depend on
1) your ability to learn how the underpayment arose in the first place.
2) your people skills talking to HMRC
3) paying a professional to take on HMRC on your behalf. If HMRC have messed this up good and proper they will have to pay your professional costs for you but, if HMRC have got this right then the bill for the taxand the [professional fees will be down to you.

sunrise27_2

thank you for your very informative reply , what you say makes a lot of sense
yes my husband did drive nice cars but they are only company cars they never belong to us , if he leaves a job the car goes with it , as was the case he left the job at the beginning of 2008 and took a big pay cut as he was unhappy in his career so the company car went and he drove a 51 plate mondeo which cost us a lot of money when the turbo went but thats another story
I will be fighting this I may not win but I like a fight lol
and just because we were in that postion four years ago doesn't mean that we are now, four years ago we would have been in a much better position to find the £350 that we are now
and if the tax office were writing to him trust me I would know

sunrise27_2

hubby has just informed me that he didn't have a jaguar x type sport , he had a jaguar x type s and the list price was about £22.000 ish not the £29791 that is on the form , I can get proof of this from the leasing company do you think that will make a difference

chrismac1

yes, it should reduce the benefit by 26% or so. Labour made this tax about as complex as it is possible to think of making a car benefit tax, so you need g/km to get the benefit amount right as well as list price. But the amount is pro-rata to the list price.

sunrise27_2

wouldn't it be funny if they ended up owing us money lol

BoGoF

sunrise27 wrote: »

and if the tax office were writing to him trust me I would know

What he would have had though was a notice of coding for 07/08 and he would have received a P11d from his employer. There is a responsibility on the individual to compare the P11d figure(s) with the figure in the tax code and if they are different do something about it.

That is where you may fail in convincing HMRC that they shouldn't collect the money.

sunrise27_2

I do understand that but if they have got the wrong car down on the forms why should we pay tax on a car we've never had ???

chrismac1

I'd imagine you might fail to convince HMRC as many of the Tribunals they bring are just plain daft, no commercial organisation spending their own money would bring them. However, even though HMRC might reject your case I think you've got a great chance in a Tribunal, plus on esc a19 it is common for HMRC to reject folk 4 or 5 times and then cave in.

sunrise27_2

would a tribunal cost us money ??? I will fight this as I don't intend paying for something I haven't had

dori2o

sunrise27 wrote: »

I do understand that but if they have got the wrong car down on the forms why should we pay tax on a car we've never had ???

It's not HMRC that will have the wrong car on the forms, by which I assume you mean the P11d.

The employer fills in the P11d, if it is incorrect it is the employer that has to update the information with HMRC. Unless the employer confirms that the P11d is incorrect then HMRC will continue to use the figures they have