Imfants' property income tax returns

Query posed 27th November 2023= HMRC reaction

Didn't find your answer?

UPDATE

 HMRC received SA105's for a brother and sister and have completely lost the plot. Their circumstances were identical. The two retuns had been submitted in the same envelope.

For brother they accepted the return and agreed computations without penalty or requirement to file returns for earlier years.

For sister they rejected SA105, required SA107 instead and claimed penalties for failure to file returns for earlier years for which no tax was due. 
The bare trusts had been filed with HMRC Trust registration servicve

Any suggestions??

Replies (4)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
By richard thomas
18th May 2024 19:32

Yes, tell us more facts. What trust? How many trusts? What's an SA105?; what's an SA 107? What is the history of HMRC issuing notices to file, and to whom?

Thanks (0)
Replying to richard thomas:
avatar
By Paul Crowley
18th May 2024 20:33

Just read the prior post.
https://www.accountingweb.co.uk/any-answers/infants-income-exceeds-pa-re...
Or at least part of it. Not enough time to read it in full and make an edit.

But more detail is the only way that anyone can really consider what happened. All we have is that HMRC have been inconsistent. Nothing new there.
People are not consistent.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Tax Dragon
18th May 2024 21:32

Who was penalised?

Thanks (2)
avatar
By More unearned luck
19th May 2024 12:50

It's unclear if just the income from property pages (without the rest of the returns) or complete returns c/w the income from property pages were submitted. It seems very unlikely that HMRC would demand just the trust etc pages, so I assume that it is the latter.

If the subject matter of the bare trust was a let property then the income should have been returned by the beneficial owners on the IFP pages of their returns.

How old are the siblings?
Who has been issued with NTFs and LFPs? The siblings or the trustees or all?

Thanks (2)