Share this content
0
1292

EYU to correct HMRC's failed processing of an EYU

Scope?

Didn't find your answer?

Search AccountingWEB

In June I submitted EYU's for a client for the four years ended 5 April 2018, giving rise to a substantial repayment.

I've spoken to HMRC today, and after an hour going through the figures, it's apparent the the updated figures in respect of employee NI has not processed correctly at their end, even though tax, student loan and employer's NI have. The suggestion was to re-submit.

On what basis do I re-submit - from the original FPS figures, or from the EYU figures (i.e. do I resubmit the same EYUs, or just the employee NI figures)?

Using BPT. It seems HMRC's own software cocks RTI up as easily as third party.

Replies

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
By jcace
08th Aug 2018 14:15

The EYU you submit from BPT will only show the changes to be applied, not the underlying figures. As long as you know what amounts have previously been submitted, you should be able to calculate the correction to be reported.

Thanks (0)
08th Aug 2018 14:18

Never used BPT, but the EYU as submitted should just have positive numbers or negative numbers in the field that requires updating. If it's just the employee NI numbers that need updating, then the EYU as submitted just has to show the difference you want to adjust by.

Most software asks you to put the before and after figures in, but this is just to generate the difference. It's the difference that gets filed.

So I would do whatever you want to get to the right adjustment. If you want to be super duper careful, I would put in the before figures as the numbers that HMRC now believes it has, and the after figures as what you want it to be - and the difference should just be the NI adjustment you want.

RTI sucks big time.

Thanks (0)
08th Aug 2018 14:55

EYU's work on differences I think so you start from the figures HMRC have now and correct the error sections only I think

Thanks (0)
08th Aug 2018 14:56

Well, it seems like it's not possible if BPT was used (our software doesn't support EYUs and BPT doesn't appear to allow you to amend the previous figures, which are currently correctly recorded as NIL (since that's the correct outcome).
Given that HMRC were also quoting Nov at least for repayment, and suggesting that raising a disputed charge (which would take a year or more to resolve) is the most reliable option, I've gone to the AAM now in the hope that things can move more quickly. Whilst the UK amendments give rise to an overpayment in excess of £50k, corrections in the RoI gives rise to a liability in excess of €60k. This is all tax on the same money, and a serious threat to cash flow.

Thanks (1)
08th Aug 2018 15:06

We've had a similar situation recently with a director-only payroll where the director was a bit random in taking salary. In March we established how much she'd taken across 2017/18 and the Month 12 FPS should have updated her year to date figures. It patently didn't, as the client later received underpayment letters.

We had to use BPT to submit an EYU. For the "previously submitted" figures, use the figures that HMRC are currently holding. You then enter the corrected figures and BPT calculates and submits the difference.

In other words, don't make the mistake that I did, of thinking that "previously submitted" should be the figures on my M12 FPS - HMRC hadn't recognised those figures in the first place so there's no point using them. Consequently I had to submit a 2nd EYU.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By PBH64
08th Aug 2018 17:19

The calculation after 19th April is last FPS plus sum of all EYUs. So when you do another EYU for NI you need to make sure that the figures for tax etc are last FPS and first EYU otherwise your second EYU will reverse the first for the figures that are currently right. The quicker the EYU is put on a revised YTD basis the better.

Thanks (0)
08th Aug 2018 21:54

If you email the disputed charges team direct they will send you their spreadsheet showing their system details.
Identify which employee has the issue as you only need to do the corrections. You then enter that detail from spreadsheet followed by the negative or positive adjustment.
The team will then monitor the amendment through and let you know outcome and/or any extra actions needed.
I have done this twice this year for new clients and both times took less than two weeks. Posted link previously so follow down my profile to the answer I posted it in.

Thanks (0)
to Marion Hayes
08th Aug 2018 22:13

15th May 2018

Edit

First step is to contact the dispute team.
[email protected]
give them the year and paye references
they will send you a spreadsheet showing what they have recorded. It may be that the employers allowance was claimed/unclaimed, or other liability was changed. Once you have identified the wrong entry you only have to correct the errors. using Basic Tools. You don't re-input every empployee

Thanks (1)
to Marion Hayes
09th Aug 2018 08:24

And herein lies the problem. BPT was used to do the (fully correct) EYU. HMRC RTI got it wrong. However, because BPT has already been used, BPT now thinks that HMRC have the correct figures, and so it's impossible to send another to correct HMRC's screw up.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By jcace
to SteLacca
09th Aug 2018 09:54

You could force it :).
The actual EYU submission will only report the differences that you enter into BPT. You will be able to see the previously submitted amount, so you could enter whatever amount is required to make the difference. The EYU submission doesn't report the underlying figures, just the amendment required. As long as you are certain of the amounts held by HMRC, you can create an EYU to say what it needs to.

Thanks (0)
to jcace
09th Aug 2018 10:58

I know, but there doesn't appear to be any way to amend the submitted figures without amending the underlying figures, which are protected.

Thanks (0)
to SteLacca
09th Aug 2018 11:14

Oh, figured it out. I have to re-create duplicate employee records in BPT to get to a blank EYO, creating an extra hours worth of work that's un-billable to fix HMRC's sh!te systems error.

What a wholly pointless waste of time. Why not simply have a "correct figure" submission and have done with it, instead of all this differences carp.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By jcace
to SteLacca
09th Aug 2018 12:13

You don't need to amend the protected underlying figures. Suppose BPT says that the Ees NI is £1,000 (and that's now protected in BPT), but HMRC say that they only have notification of £420, you simply need to add an EYU and start off by entering Ees NI as £1,580, i.e. £580 higher than previously reported. Once you have gone through all of the entries and produce the EYU, it will only show NI increase £580, which is what is wanted. No need to create duplicate record - just work with what you've got. You know the end result you require, you've got your starting position (protected figures in BPT), so you just have to enter the difference.

Thanks (0)
avatar
to jcace
09th Aug 2018 11:15

Even if your payroll system supports EYUs, you still have to jump through hoops like this when RTI has messed up.

So say HMRC think someone's tax paid is £1000 less than it actually was, despite your payroll system having reported the correct figure on the FPS. You have to :
1) adjust the payroll figure up by £1,000 (thus making it wrong!)
2) submit the EYU which will contain the £1,000 adjustment and therefore make HMRC's value correct.
3) adjust the payroll figure down by £1,000 to make it correct again.
4) take action to stop the system generating a second EYU for this second adjustment, which would put HMRC back where they were to start with!

The problem isn't the design of the EYU. It works fine for the job it was designed for, which is reporting genuine post-year-end adjustments to payroll. The problem is that HMRC are trying to use the EYU to synchronise the values they hold to those held by the employer, which it was NOT designed to do.

Thanks (0)
to neiltonks
09th Aug 2018 11:46

With respect, it was never fine for what it was designed. I used to be a software engineer, and to produce something as convoluted and unpredictable as RTI in its' current form takes a special kind of special.

The user experience is everything, and when it comes to HMRC systems generally, but most predominantly RTI, HMRC is sadly lacking.

Thanks (0)
to neiltonks
09th Aug 2018 13:41

Except the EYUs reduced two employees to NIL across the board for four years. This would have meant, using your solution, that BPT would be recording negative NI for each for all years. I can't imagine even BPT is that stupid.

Though of course, despite wholly correct EYUs having been submitted, HMRC still managed to get it wrong, so who knows.

Thanks (0)
By RedFive
to Marion Hayes
09th Aug 2018 12:05

Bookmarked for when I inevitably need to use this.

Thanks Marion!

Thanks (0)
to Marion Hayes
17th Aug 2018 08:25

Well, that's now defunct information.

"Hello

Thank you for your email enquiry, this mailbox is for returned information requested by HMRC

and we are unable to deal with new enquiries.

For your Pay as You Earn (PAYE) enquiry please contact our Employers Helpline on 0300 200 3200."

Employer's helpline can't do anything. IT helpline can't do anything. There is, literally, no way to correct HMRC failing systems.

Thanks (0)
Share this content