Share this content

SEISS grant received pre populated total £1 mill !

SEISS grant received pre populated total - out by over £1 million !

Didn't find your answer?

Ok good news is that the SEISS API data is now flowing through to our tax return software - which is great so that we can ensure the totals match up as one would expect.

Unfortuantely the first return we have received data for  has an amount of 1,066,900.00 which is being flagged up as the SEISS grant received - our client certainly aint Messi thats for sure !

Obviously this value is complete nonsense - other than enter correct figure and make a note and probably ring the sa helpline for further instruction - does anyone know the best course of action if the pre populated figure in nonsense. Kinda expecting that this may cause a delay in the return being processed if the figures don't match.

Thankfully not even hmrc will try then line that "their figures are correct" with this one - one would guess? 

Obvious read across is that this infoi is not toi be trusted in any capacity based on my sample of 1.

Replies (22)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
By Southwestbeancounter
16th Aug 2021 14:51

On the back of your post I've just checked the two tax return software packages we use - Taxfiler and Sage Taxation.

Taxfiler is showing no details re the SEISS yet but Sage Taxation is - yay I thought!

With the one random account I checked, my client received £705,800 in the 2020/21 fiscal year according to HMRC!

We've waited months for this dross! It's simply unacceptable - they are surely taking the proverbial mickey now!!!

Thanks (1)
Replying to Southwestbeancounter:
avatar
By rmillaree
16th Aug 2021 14:58

Yep i have done some further checking and we have another one with 290k !!

I have been in touch with btc software and they are aware of the issue and liassing with hmrc - they did say hold off submitting returns for afew days and perhaps this issue may be sorted.

Sound like issue if deffo with hmrc and not the software companies.

In some respects better info provided is nonsensical totals rather than something close to the truth.

Thanks (5)
Replying to rmillaree:
ALISK
By atleastisoundknowledgable...
16th Aug 2021 17:30

rmillaree wrote:

In some respects better info provided is nonsensical totals rather than something close to the truth.

Sad, isn’t it, that you didn’t even mention HMRC getting it right as an option.

Thanks (1)
Replying to Southwestbeancounter:
avatar
By Southwestbeancounter
16th Aug 2021 14:59

As a matter of interest rmillaree are you using Sage Taxation, as if you are it could be a software issue not HMRC, but if you are using a different package then it is obviously down to HMRC.

Looking at one I know the answer for - the software says he's received £2,157,000 whereas it was actually £21,570 - so it appears it could be multiplying the correct answer by 100 but no doubt someone needs to put in a quick fix!!

Thanks (1)
Replying to Southwestbeancounter:
avatar
By Southwestbeancounter
16th Aug 2021 15:01

Ah our messages crossed - you are using different software so it definitely appears to be a HMRC glitch!

We'll have to have a competition to see who has the most ridiculous result!!

Thanks (1)
Replying to Southwestbeancounter:
avatar
By rmillaree
16th Aug 2021 15:09

"so it definitely appears to be a HMRC glitch!"

Hmmmmm - anyone remember Superman 3 ? (Richard Pryor) - lets hope no one is skimming the difference out of hmrc !!!

Thanks (1)
Replying to Southwestbeancounter:
avatar
By rmillaree
16th Aug 2021 15:02

We use BTC

Thanks (2)
Replying to Southwestbeancounter:
avatar
By bernard michael
17th Aug 2021 09:36

Southwestbeancounter wrote:

As a matter of interest rmillaree are you using Sage Taxation, as if you are it could be a software issue not HMRC, but if you are using a different package then it is obviously down to HMRC.

Looking at one I know the answer for - the software says he's received £2,157,000 whereas it was actually £21,570 - so it appears it could be multiplying the correct answer by 100 but no doubt someone needs to put in a quick fix!!


Actually it's just missing a decimal point eg £21570.00
Thanks (0)
Replying to bernard michael:
avatar
By Southwestbeancounter
17th Aug 2021 13:03

Yes we had actually worked that out but it's still not acceptable!

Thanks (1)
avatar
By AdamMurphy
16th Aug 2021 16:20

And this is exactly why HMRC should not be proceeding with MTD - they can't even get current systems working correctly.

Thanks (7)
ALISK
By atleastisoundknowledgable...
16th Aug 2021 17:31

And this is why I don’t use the pre-pop API function on Taxcalc for SATRs

Thanks (1)
Replying to atleastisoundknowledgable...:
avatar
By rmillaree
16th Aug 2021 17:50

To be fair to BTC who we use - we normally get the option to use what we like - all BTC does is politely say you have 10,006 ref seiss and hmrc have £1,000,600.00 would you like to overwrite your prepped figures with hmrc trash? (well not quite worded like that)

So on the basis i enter figures old skool at least the API data can potentially flag up item of interest where we may have go it wrong - or more likely client may not have advised of their income sources.

Not sure if Taxcalc does similar and at least lets you view the info that you are ignoring ?

Thanks (2)
avatar
By Paul Crowley
16th Aug 2021 18:42

It it the case that that HMRC are showing pennies as pounds?
If it was not so critical it would be funny

Remember HMRC will eventually be wholly relying on third person figures
The claimed rule that taxpayer must FORCE third person to correct all errors as clearly taxpayers cannot be trusted with tax returns.

Thanks (3)
By Duggimon
17th Aug 2021 09:24

If that's the kind of information that's on the HMRC side it would explain why so many perfectly correct SATRs are being flagged for checks due to SEISS entries.

Thanks (5)
By petersaxton
17th Aug 2021 09:24

I tried using HMRC figures when they first introduced this pre-population thing.
It was total nonsense.
I would recommend that people avoid using anything from HMRC if possible.

Thanks (3)
avatar
By snickersinatwix
17th Aug 2021 11:43

Glad it is not just us! We have had one too where client allegedly received over £1m. I am looking forward to ringing them when they "correct" our tax return with their figures. Also looking forward to seeing our client's face when they get the tax bill.

Thanks (2)
RedFive
By RedFive
17th Aug 2021 12:36

TaxCalc same.

It is just missing a decimal point though the numbers are all correct.

It's not rocket science to have worked that out to be fair.

Thanks (0)
Replying to RedFive:
avatar
By Hugo Fair
17th Aug 2021 21:00

No it's not rocket science (for a human) to have worked that out ... but the future according to HMRC is one where automated data flows seamlessly to & from their digital systems (whilst the promised benefits only accrue if humans don't need to check/correct that data)!

And this is just one of the most instantly visible of their mistakes ... many more lie in waiting (sometimes known but ignored for years).

Thanks (3)
avatar
By snickersinatwix
17th Aug 2021 16:11

So I have just had an email from BTC reporting the error and telling us to hold off filing with HMRC for now. Also this:

HMRC has confirmed the fault to be from their side and has asked that agents experiencing this issue report it to HMRC to help raise awareness.

You could not make it up! Can HMRC not tell their own staff? Do they really expect us to waste at least 15 minutes (on a good day) ringing them up to report a problem that they should already know about???

Thanks (2)
Replying to snickersinatwix:
avatar
By Paul Crowley
17th Aug 2021 21:15

HMRC just do not get IT and never will
Worse, they identify a problem and refuse to deal with it at their end.
Asking agents to call them on every client that got SEISS?
They do not show respect to their staff that currently cannot cope with ordinary known routines
That has energised me to submit as many tax returns as possible in the next couple of weeks

Thanks (2)
Replying to Paul Crowley:
avatar
By snickersinatwix
18th Aug 2021 08:44

Ha - I just said exactly the same thing Paul. I am NOT going to delay filing anything and if they send my client a demand for £450,000+ of tax, good luck to them. I am also NOT going to ring up their help line to tell them their system is not working because they already know this.

Thanks (1)
Replying to snickersinatwix:
avatar
By Leywood
17th Aug 2021 21:30

To then be told us not a common fault, as usual. Bloody HMRC, spending millions on projects and cannot get the basics right.

Thanks (3)
Share this content