SA tax return for 2010-2011, but no utr!

dori2o

chrismac1 wrote: »

Simple dori2o. All I ask is that HMRC set up their systems to the normal business standards of the 21st Century and not the 19th. If accountants and taxpayers have 31 days to appeal a penalty I see no reason why 31 days is not sufficient for HMRC, for example. Luckily for taxpayers people who sit on Tribunals and Treasury select committees don't share your views that continuing to uphold rubbish processes and interminable delays over doing simple things is acceptable.

But in the case of this thread there is only 1 person responsible for the situation, and it's not HMRC.

The same with people who leave it til the last day and then complain the computer system is slow, or has locked them out. The only fault there lies with the individual for waiting til the last minute to do their return when they have had at least 8 months to do it.

If accountants and taxpayers didn't flout the rules and submitted their information on time there wouldn't be half the delays there are.

chrismac1

Well it comes down to this. Who do you want as your accountant? Someone who says "Give up, it was all your fault, the HMRC system is wonderful!" or someone who says "Fight this, you are behaving reasonably if a little bit late, I've got other clients off thousands of pounds on Esc A19 and other appeals and you can call them up if you like, the HMRC system is a joke!"

Pennywise

dori2o wrote: »

As for Employers end of year returns, why should it matter when the penalty notices are issued. Employers know full well what the filing dates are and the penalties for missing these dates.

Why should a penalty notice be issued at the end of May? Simply to act as a reminder?

If the penalty issued in August/September is £300/£400 then obviously the employer is 3/4 months late with the return. I see no problem with this. The employer has failed to abide by the regulations set and so must face the penalty.

It matters because, as can be seen from the successful tribunal appeals, some employers have genuinely thought they'd filed their P35s on time, only to be told, several months later by HMRC that they'd only filed a "test" file, which is ridiculously easy to do by mistake, and for which the HMRC automatic acceptance response doesn't say whether it was a "test" or not.

It also matters because it's easy for HMRC to re-program their computer to send out penalties as and when they fall due. I.e. one month late, kerching, £100 fine, common sense to send out a demand at that point in time. Waiting 4/5 months is nothing more than money grabbing by HMRC. In the darkest past when HMRC processed P35s by hand, then yes, a few months would be a reasonable timescale to process millions of returns but in the compulsory computer filing world, then HMRC know, as of 19 May who has and hasn't filed and could easily send automated reminders/demands without delay.

As for seeing no problem with a £400/£500 penalty, then you are missing the point of the penalty - they are (as confirmed by tribunals) an incentive for taxpayers/firms to file on time, and NOT a punishment for not filing on time. The reason they increase over time is to act as a further incentive to comply. As confirmed by the tribunals, if the firm isn't told of the non-compliance and isn't aware of ever increasing fines, then those fines are usually reduced accordingly. In one case, a late P35 fine of several hundred pounds was reduced to £100 because the employer filed it immediately upon receipt of the first penalty notice - i.e. as soon as they became aware it hadn't been filed correctly!

Thank heavens for tribunals, is all I can say - a little bit of common sense in the jobsworth world of HMRC.

chrismac1

TC1631 - Tribunal case between McDonald and HMRC. Date of verdict 13 Jan 2012. Final Score MacDonald 1 HMRC 0.

The moral of this case is - keep good records of your dealings with HMRC, this includes your phone calls and online submission attempts!

"The tribunal judge concluded that the HMRC recording system was unreliable, one factor was when the taxpayers advisor was able to provide electronic confirmation of receipt for clients who were later fined for late filing. He concluded that HMRC simply relying on their recording system was insufficient."

Pennywise

Overall, I have no problem with HMRC imposing deadlines and time limits. However, what I do have problems with is that whilst HMRC want everyone else to comply with their timescales, they don't want to be constrained themselves.

Take VAT returns - HMRC regard 30 days as reasonable for a business to prepare and submit a VAT return, yet seem incapable of responding to a letter addressed to them within 30 days - a massive organisation replying to a letter is far easier/quicker than a one man business spending hours on his VAT return every quarter.

I've recently suffered a delay of over a year to get a relatively simple taxpayer's affairs sorted out, which involved numerous communications to and fro, with HMRC constantly wrongly changing a PAYE code, finally getting it right, and then changing back to be wrong again. If only we could fine HMRC £100 for every month of delay caused by them!

Another case was a joiner who initially registered as a CIS contractor but then stopped using subbies and we wrote to HMRC to tell them so. Fast forward 3 YEARS and the postman was weighed down with penalty notices amounting to over £30,000 in literally dozens of envelopes for non submission of monthly CIS returns, the penalties for each month growing as each month passes. When I phoned up, they finally admitted receiving the letter but still refused to cancel the penalties without us writing in to formally "ask" for them to be zeroised, but worse still, insisting that we write separately to appeal each month's penalty - needless to say we told them in no uncertain terms that wasn't going to happen. A threat to the tribunals and then common sense prevailed and they were zeroised - result another van load of separate letters to each penalty confirming nil penalty. But still, the penalties "stood" with fines reduced to nil, but still on their file as penalties raised, not cancelled, but zeroised, which could jeopardise future tax relationship, so again, more threats of tribunal before the penalties were formally cancelled! You really couldn't make it up!

So, HMRC, let's have a level playing field. If you want to fine taxpayers and businesses for being late or for mistakes, then let's have the ability for HMRC to be forced to pay automatic compensation when they are late or make mistakes. Don't think it will happen though do you?

chrismac1

I think those of us who deal with them every day all feel the same way. Unfortunately the country would be bankrupt if we could fine them the way they fine us! (Well, even more bankrupt than it already is.)

Gas_Powered_Toothbrush

chrismac1 wrote: »

Well it comes down to this. Who do you want as your accountant?

Anyone but you.

suso

chrismac1 wrote: »

Well it comes down to this. Who do you want as your accountant? "Fight this, you are behaving reasonably if a little bit late, "

what is a clear defination of wrong? there is no question that the OP was late in informing HMRC, as you love tribunals so much, I'm surprised that you haven't referred to this.

http://www.financeandtaxtribunals.gov.uk

tribunals heard so far in this year, all are income / corporation tax decisions:-

06/01/2012TC 01727 appeal substanially dismissed Employment income
05/01/2012TC 01726 penalty reduced from £400 to £331 Penalty
05/01/2012TC 01725 penalty reduced from £900.00 to £700.00 Penalty
05/01/2012TC 01724 appeal dismissed Penalty
05/01/2012TC 01723 appeal dismissed Penalty
05/01/2012TC 01722 appeal allowed Penalty
05/01/2012TC 01721 appeal dismissed Penalty
05/01/2012TC 01720 appeal dismissed Sub-contractors in the construction industry
05/01/2012TC 01719 appeal dismissed Penalty
05/01/2012TC 01716 Appeal stood over awaiting further consultation Penalty
04/01/2012TC 01704 appeal dismissed Employment income
04/01/2012TC 01706 appeal allowed Penalty
04/01/2012TC 01707 appeal dismissed Penalty
04/01/2012TC 01708 appeal allowed Penalty
04/01/2012TC 01709 appeal disallowed Penalty
04/01/2012TC 01710 appeal not allowed Penalty
04/01/2012TC 01711 appeal not allowed Penalty
04/01/2012TC 01712 appeal not allowed Penalty
04/01/2012TC 01713 appeal disallowed Penalty
04/01/2012TC 01714 appeal allowed in part Penalty
04/01/2012TC 01704 appeal dismissed Employment income
03/01/2012TC 01701 appeal allowed Penalty
03/01/2012TC 01702 appeal allowed Penalty


so according to the tribunals that you live by its

Appeals Dismissed In Full - 14
Appeal Allowed Full - 5
Allowed/dismissed in part - 3
Awaiting a Verdict -1

chrismac1 wrote: »

Not necessarily a pointless rant. On another tax..............

a pointless post, not helping or informing the op, and then to make it even more pointless you introduce an entirely different tax / scenario, that will in no way help the OP

chrismac1 wrote: »

.
If accountants and taxpayers have 31 days to appeal a penalty I see no reason why 31 days is not sufficient for HMRC, for example. Luckily for taxpayers people who sit on Tribunals and Treasury select committees don't share your views that continuing to uphold rubbish processes and interminable delays over doing simple things is acceptable.

perhaps your calender is incorrect, I wouldn't be surprised,

The op, will receive a UTR within 31 days, which fits in nicely with your demands,

They called 19 Jan, and will receive UTR by 17 Feb

Brighty

My brother is in the same position, needs to do his first ever SA for 2010/11 because of rental income. He is going to ring for a UTR today/tomorrow. As he is a non resident landlord (lives in Germany) the letting agent have been deducting basic rate tax from the rent, so he will owe nothing, in fact assuming he gets a tax free allowance over here, he should get it all back. So long as he files a return online as soon as he gets his UTR, will he avoid any kind of fine/penalty?

Cheers

Brighty