You might also be interested in
Replies (7)
Please login or register to join the discussion.
This is
a really interesting case. The main part I like is that the tribunal stated that Cooke could manage his financial affairs as he saw fit (and not for the benefit of HMRC).
Following on from that. f you buy a property or shares with a view to sell at a profit to pay a tax bill and the market crashes it is a reasonable excuse?
It would appear (or I might be reading too much into it) that if you set up your financial affairs specifically to deal with tax liabilities and it goes [***] up, you have a reasonable excuse.
Risk element?
I suppose the difference would be that with the market crashing it's something you should always be 'aware' of. It's always a risk you take.a really interesting case. The main part I like is that the tribunal stated that Cooke could manage his financial affairs as he saw fit (and not for the benefit of HMRC).
Following on from that. f you buy a property or shares with a view to sell at a profit to pay a tax bill and the market crashes it is a reasonable excuse?
It would appear (or I might be reading too much into it) that if you set up your financial affairs specifically to deal with tax liabilities and it goes [***] up, you have a reasonable excuse.
At the time of this particular case I imagine he didn't think there was any risk of his marriage breaking down.
“Following on from that. If
“Following on from that. If you buy a property or shares with a view to sell at a profit to pay a tax bill and the market crashes it is a reasonable excuse?
It would appear (or I might be reading too much into it) that if you set up your financial affairs specifically to deal with tax liabilities and it goes [***] up, you have a reasonable excuse.”
In this case, he had a reasonable excuse because he did have a means to pay, but the means to pay was being blocked by his wife.
I haven’t read the full case, but I gather that HMRC’s main argument was that there were no events outside his control that prevented him from settling his tax liability. But this wasn’t the case.
Its sounds fair
I think marriage breakdown is a reasonable excuse, sometimes you can get away with a reasonable excuse and sometimes you cannot, for smaller appeals it can depend on who's desk your appeal letter drops on and the personality and mood of the letter opener.
HMRC Habitual Liars?
What I find concerning about many of these cases where the taxpayer claims to have contacted HMRC and been told something, this is frequently denied by HMRC. I tend to believe the taxpayer in many of these cases. Just one more reason to never have any meeting or call with HMRC that isn't recorded given that, like magistrates and the police in the past, the tribunals will always side with HMRC, irrespective of lack of plausibility.
Yes, I agree it's fair
Marriage breakdowns can sometimes be amicable, but the "other side" can turn really nasty. (Speaking from experience here). However that topic is outwith this comment. It was a long time ago....
The moral is that telephone calls to HMRC are useless unless followed up in writing "further to our telephone conversation with (name) on (date & time) we agreed ........" It's the luck of the draw if you get a full name of the telephone respondent.
So why bother with the phone at all? Try telling THAT to clients!
Stop the cynicism campaign
Dear markfd
Please, the rude comments are not needed.
It is correct that in the olden days there frequently arose some question about the neutrality
of local commissioners, especially when one saw them at breaks during the hearing enjoying coffee and a bun with the inspectors.
Nevertheless, the current tribunals are a quite different animal. They are staffed by lawyers, and experienced ones at that.
The point is if you are required to appear before a tribunal you must do your homework. This is essence means understanding that, from a professional, the tribunal expects competent professional standards. If you have not previously appeared in a court, be fair to your client. Spend a few hours at a court listening and taking note as to how evidence is presented.
If English is your second language, practice speaking via use of a recording machine. Listen to your self. Above all do your homework, and prepare your evidence in such a way that the tribunal may easily see you have done your homework. It is really unfair to your client to appear before a tribunal but not being carefully and properly prepared, in procedure, in evidence, and in presentation.
Also, it really annoys your fellow expert professionals hearing your case.
The point is, do not denigrate the Tribunal if you do not do your job properly.