An anonymous subscriber disclosed that they had a PAYE enquiry into a client’s affairs which had dragged on for nearly a year due mainly to the client not having the relevant contract and the loss of the adviser firm’s tax manager (see 2 January 2008 [1]).

HMRC decided that enough was enough and started hassling the client, explaining that interest was due on unpaid tax. The subscriber had now replied to HMRC and, having completed research, it was clear that no tax was due. It was also clear that the HMRC clerk dealing with the matter was unable to ‘fight back’ without referring the matter to a superior.

‘Anon’ has had a reply now stating that due to volume of work and the fact that the clerk was on leave, the HMRC employee would reply fully when she returned to work. ‘Anon’ wanted to keep the pressure on, and was giving HMRC another 8 days before referring the matter to the tax tribunal, as the client was now getting restless. Have other subscribers done this, and can anyone suggest a better solution? ‘Anon’ had now spoken to the previous tax manager, whose view was that one should not upset HMRC.

Alan Lowrey referred back to his previous reply to a query by Paula Sparrow regarding delays in settling a compliance review. His view was that a letter to the officer in question, copied to the HMRC Area Director, should get matters moving.

John Ryan observed that, after nearly 50 years of dealing with the Revenue, he had found that the only method that works is ‘after three strikes’ and no response then get the Area Director involved.

Peter Jones would have e-mailed Dave Hartnett himself at dave.hartnett@hmrc.gsi.gov.uk [2]. He had a similar case where he took this action and it was sorted out within three days. Dave is known not to take prisoners!

This case underlines the problem of business relationships with HMRC. Should one expect the same speed and co-operation that one expects from other commercial and professional firms? Apparently not, and HMRC staff would no doubt say that due to redundancies, computer problems and reorganisation they have far too much work to do and massive arrears of correspondence.

This produces immediate resentment from taxpayers and their advisers. I have often thought hat HMRC staff should be made to attend a ‘commissionaires’ meeting where there is unwarranted delay. Resentment grows because HMRC staff can pressure taxpayers and their advisers where there are delays, but there is no real mechanism where the facts are the other way round. One can apply to the Adjudicator, but this can only realistically be achieved after the event, and one has to recognise that her office is staffed by HMRC staff on secondment.

In the current case there may have been some delay by the practice, due to the departure of the tax manager, and the querist should acknowledge this fact. I would personally adopt a ‘carrot and stick’ approach. Why not make a friendly phone call to the HMRC officer, or the HMRC office manager as a first move. If this does not work, then involving the Area Director seems to be the only solution. Going to the tax tribunal would be a very costly operation, and one should not use this as a threat.

Having just read some news about a House of Commons Committee who have berated HMRC for not producing enough revenue from the ‘black economy’ I despair. One of the targets mentioned was small businesses. What about big business and their failure to pay adequate taxes in the UK? Here I agree with Richard Murphy. There is only so much that the small business community can bear. Such businesses need encouragement, not threats, in the current economic climate.