Member Since: 5th Apr 2005
14th Jul 2021
@ sunshine (OP).
In short, therefore, no INDEXATION ALLOWANCE is available in your client’s case.
But is was available in 2004 to determine the "no gain/no loss" value of the transfer from husband to wife.
The OP's premise is correct. I haven't checked the arithmetic or the variables.
24th Feb 2021
My point remains that the first part of s118(2) does not extend the filing date. It, as does the second part which provides for a reasonable excuse, deems that there is not a failure and therefore the person cannot suffer the consequences of such a failure.
Harra may believe that covid gives a reasonable excuse, but, as you pointed out in your first post, he cannot determine when that excuse will end, or how much time is reasonable to allow after it ends.
That is why it is more likely that HMRC have relied on the first part of S118(2). Both parts have exactly the same effect, but only the first allows HMRC to give an end date.
24th Feb 2021
It’s a deeming provision. You cannot deem that someone has not failed to meet a deadline unless they have actually failed to meet it. It follows that everyone who files in February has in fact failed to meet the 31 January deadline, but will be deemed not to have failed.
If you file your return on or after 1 March you have failed to meet the 31 January deadline but will not be protected by the first part of s118(2).
Absolutely no affect on later penalties or interest.
23rd Feb 2021
I agree. HMRC have not changed the statutory deadline. I did not suggest that they did.
They can however allow further time. s118(2) is a deeming provision. If HMRC allows further time, the person has still failed to meet the statutory deadline but is then deemed not to have failed to meet it. By deeming this, the person is not liable to a penalty.
HMRC press release makes this clear. It says that "normally" a person needs a reasonable excuse, but this year they are not issuing penalties for a month to help those unable to meet the deadline. That is clearly allowing further time.
20th Feb 2021
HMRC can allow further time for person to comply with an obligation. Where they do that, a person is deemed not to have failed to meet the statutory deadline (s118(2)). That is what has happened here. Nothing to do with excuses, reasonable or otherwise.
4th Jul 2020
It's the Dunning-Kruger principle (to keep the psychology train running). He's at the first spike in the curve.
3rd Jul 2020
Yes. Follow the link I gave you.
2nd Jul 2020
If barristers were right, we wouldn't have any need for courts or trials.
2nd Jul 2020
1st Jul 2020
In both this case and Robertson they concentrated solely on assessing income, and found that there was no income. But that is not the end of it. What about a case where a claim is found to be excessive and an assessment is needed to charge more tax without charging more income?
S29 (1) is not just about assessing income.
a) where income has not been assessed
b) where tax charged is insufficient
c) where a claim to relief is excessive
Given the comments by the UT in Robertson, this will be appealed.