Member Since: 23rd Apr 2013
12th Dec 2016
I sure hope everyone uses bookkeeping software that can cope with your flat rate percentage changing each quarter!
16th Sep 2016
That said, in trying to throw his wife under the same bus his evidence does imply she incorrectly prepared (or approved) her own tax return which should have had repayments on it.
26th Jun 2015
Post is just as bad
The comment regarding post seems to be the norm right now.
I have been chasing some late filed paper returns since the start of March and it was only resolved last week. Agents line confirmed a 13 week backlog of post at the moment and that is just for the matter to be dealt with initially. It may well then have a 4 week trip to another internal department before action is taken.
Absolutely disgusting that we as agents and our clients get letters demanding 30 day responses (having arrived nearly 2 weeks after the date it was written thanks to HMRCs 4th class post), yet the return correspondence takes over 90 days.
You would think that once a matter has been opened and HMRC write back for further information the response from us would be fast-tracked by some sort of triage system on post rather than simply being put to the back of the queue once again.
15th Jun 2015
Has anyone come across HMRC agreeing to fax them through with the UTR redacted followed by an original (not redacted) in the post?
I have had this a few times now and never understood it. I used my clients UTR to clear the security checks as agent so you know I already have this information. Why redact it??
8th Jul 2014
We seldom have to deal with the administrative circus that is the HMRC VAT department.
I have the dubious pleasure of keeping myself "amused" with dealing with PAYE, RTI and (shortly) auto-enrolment problems instead of VAT.
Any rules change that removes HMRC's incentive to move investigations forward cannot possibly be good for the taxpayer. If you have a scenario where HMRC receive the disputed money upfront (for any tax, irrespective of avoidance scheme or not), they have absolutely no reason to commit resources to its resolution. Resolving the case can only lead to two possibilities.
1) HMRC wins and gets to keep the money it already has - I guess they can at least close the file now
2) Taxpayer wins and HMRC have to repay the funds
I see no reason under these proposals why HMRC would look to close cases where they have already obtained the best result they can hope for.
7th Jul 2014
I agree that the morality point is not up for debate here. People are entitled to their views. Arguing if "immoral" advisers or "incompetent" lawmakers are at fault isn't really the point here.
The point is that HMRC were being given the power to be judge, jury and executioner in disputed tax matters and that they were also given the power to seize the funds if the taxpayer refused to make payment. It is these two powers in combination with a woeful history of incorrect HMRC assessments that got people concerned.
Whilst the powers are currently restricted to so called "dodgy" tax schemes, how long before HMRC is allowed to help themselves to incorrect PAYE/NI/CIS/SA amounts left, right and center?
7th Jul 2014
Try as we might to do the right thing, HMRC just get in the way
We've had to deal with a few of these in the past few weeks. After multiple calls and security checks we finally get told (by and large) to ignore the notices. We had a few schemes closed at the end of 2013-14 receiving penalties for no filings in 2014-15. When queried we got the response "I can see the cessation date on your filing but we haven't updated the record, please ignore the notice".
I'm very thankful we try to set up our address as the correspondence address for PAYE schemes. If the client got these notices they'd call us incompetent (has happened) despite the fact that HMRC screwed up.
@ Mr.Mischief - that PAYE coding example is a perfect example of why many agents running client payrolls just disregard the notices. You spend your professional time, for free, to correct an HMRC error only for them to repeat the mistake.
HMRC will push forward with fines in October and we will end up spending a significant portion of our working life dealing with them. They could at the very least add PAYE to the agents line prior to rolling out automated fines so that we have a hope of contacting them. The current PAYE line not only waffles on about useful information on their website (can't help with client specific queries HMRC so stop wasting my time) but can then just cut you off if it is overloaded. Come October we'll all have to adjust our working day so that we spend 8am to 9am and 7pm to 8pm on the Employers Helpline most days.
27th Jun 2014
Another Personable Practitioner here
I blame the lack of technological innovation in the office. It's forcing me to be social!
20th Jun 2014
The only people surprised by this
are HMRC themselves.
Everyone else knew RTI was going to cause problems. Nice theory but it's a theory, they don't all work in practice.
20th Mar 2014
A welcome increase but more complexity again
I can only think of one client who will benefit from this as they run about 10 connected companies sharing a pool between them however the transitional rules are always a nightmare for us to juggle let alone the client to plan around. Their businesses have different year ends (although that may change soon) and they open a new one every 12-18 months or so to add to the mix.
As the article says, it's unclear why this figure is subject to such wild variation. It's as if they have no real idea of what the threshold should be.