Share this content
0
1057

Classic burying his head in the sand!

Classic burying his head in the sand!

Potential new client.

He has an Insolvency Hearing end of this month where the Bankruptcy Trustee intends selling his home to pay his income tax/VAT debts and penalties. This is following a CCJ in October 2014, which was a result of estimated tax and VAT determinations/assessments which the client had ignored over a period of 6 years. The amount being demanded is £400K on the estimated assessments but the correct figure is more like £100K (had he submitted Tax Returns).

I know the answers to this question will range from "no" to "not a hope" to "don''t be silly", but I am wondering if there is anything whatsoever this chap can do to replace the amounts being demanded by more accurate amounts? Or has it gone too far down the line?

Thanks.

Replies

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
01st Mar 2016 20:03

It's never to late but there will be a lot of work to do in a short space of time and it may not ultimately be successful.  For this reason I'd be looking for an up front payment before starting any work.

That to one side, is the client in a position to be able to settle the lower liability plus the associated interest and penalties without sale of the home?

Another question I'd be asking is whether you the first agent the client has had deal with this or have other agents been involved at earlier stages?

If the answer to these are both yes then you should be able to get a meeting with the investigating officer and consideration of a request to adjourn the hearing.  This will then hopefully give you time in which to finalise the actuals and agree an acceptable figure with the investigating officer.

Otherwise walk away.

Thanks (1)
avatar
02nd Mar 2016 14:04

Always worth a try

I had a similar situation, estimated liability about £25k, actual liability less than £1,000. Relief under TMA Sch 1AB not in point but managed to get agreement to reduce to the correct figures anyway by concession. FTT case Montshiwa v HMRC may have had a bearing as it appears to have been decided at the same time. There were no VAT issues in the case I dealt with, only income tax.

Thanks (0)
Share this content