Save content
Have you found this content useful? Use the button above to save it to your profile.
AIA

HMRC scales down iXBRL plans

by
6th Jun 2012
Save content
Have you found this content useful? Use the button above to save it to your profile.

HMRC’s long-term strategy for mandatory iXBRL tagging has been watered down as a result of recent consultations on its “digital by default” strategy.

Following discussions with software developers and other interested parties, HMRC published guidance on 31 May indicating that it will hold back from extending its minimum tagging specification (MTS) for iXBRL accounts that accompany corporation tax returns. The current MTS is a stopgap taxonomy listing some iXBRL 1,700+ tags that companies should append to their accounts, if those data entities are present.

The MTS announcement represents a political climbdown from HMRC’s hardline stance on iXBRL compliance. According to IRIS Accountancy Soutions product director Simon Witkiss, the move was a logical response to the government’s insistence on reducing the red tape burden on business  and the decision by Companies House last July not to go ahead with mandatory iXBRL filing.

“In our submission to the digital by default submission, we also pointed out that UK GAAP will also be changing in the next few years and that it would cause extra difficulty for users if they had to adapt to the new iXBRL requirements, and then face it all over again when UK GAAP changed,” Witkiss said.

Under the coalition government, HMRC has been directed to focus its efforts on collections and enforcement. While iXBRL is an important part in gathering data for its risk assessment work, there are suggestions that the tax department does not have the skills or staff resources to cope with the vast quantities of data that mandatory filing is producing.

Since April last year, businesses and their accountants have been required to submit accounts and CT computations as files in the iXBRL format. But as part of its “soft landing” strategy, HMRC has accepted accounts that did not comply with its minimum tagging specification. In practice iXBRL files that get through the 15 Joint Filing Common Validation Checks at the government gateway have not been sent back. While not expressly admitting this is the case, the more relaxed timetable for enhancing the MTS suggests that this policy will continue. We are awaiting confirmation from HMRC that this is the case.

The original plan was for HMRC to start expanding the MTS after a two-year soft landing period, but it acceded to the overwhelming response to its consultation by announcing that it would retain the MTS as is, and only bring in limited enhancements in October 2013.

Comments have been raised about the lack of consistency between the iXBRL tags used for CT computation submissions and full accounts, so its attention over the next year and a half will be on improving the structure of the computation tags and creating a standard taxonomy that works for both purposes. “Beyond that, there will be no major change without full consultation,” HMRC said.

Ian Hicks, director of professional services at Corefiling, which is collaborating with AccountingWEB on an iXBRL-based online accounts reviewer, commented: “HMRC has invested a lot of money, resources and business change in iXBRL, and the business case stacks up if you look at the potential returns they can reap.

“But this announcement suggests they are trying to steer a line between a Draconian approach and acknowledging the practical realities both inside and outside the department. HMRC is still committed to iXBRL, but is trying to make the transition as painless as possible.”

Replies (10)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
By tanyajackson
07th Jun 2012 11:18

iXBRL

I find the fact that HMRC are letting through the non compliant filings a little worrying.  I have been happily filing my clients returns and accounts, without issues which I thought was down to me getting it right.  How do I know if I have been getting it right?  I started filing iXBRL format prior to the deadline to iron out any problems, so now I really don't know if what I am filing is compliant.  I was relying on HMRC to advise me of any problems so I could rectify them.  Another HMRC idea which sounds great but doesn't work and doesn't do the job it was intended for!!!

Thanks (0)
Replying to Kent accountant:
avatar
By david5541
07th Jun 2012 12:34

compliance

[quote=tanyajackson]

I find the fact that HMRC are letting through the non compliant filings a little worrying.  I have been happily filing my clients returns and accounts, without issues which I thought was down to me getting it right.

 " How do I know if I have been getting it right?  I started filing iXBRL format prior to the deadline to iron out any problems, so now I really don't know if what I am filing is compliant.  I was relying on HMRC to advise me of any problems so I could rectify them.  Another HMRC idea which sounds great but doesn't work and doesn't do the job it was intended for!!!"

the best route to ensuring accounts are compliant with hmrc IXBRL TAGGING (in my humble opinion)

is to use the online HMRC ct corp tax and accounts filing facility so your accounts are filed in the right format.

You can then make the minimum required HMRC disclosure for accounts purposes and print off the hmrc filed accounts(which can also if you wish be filed with ompanies house)

Thanks (1)
avatar
By Albasas
07th Jun 2012 11:35

Mystic Accountant

Just knew that this was on the cards. HMRCs going back on announced policy, tinkering around with it, using others for research & development and then changing direction is always par for the course. No surprises here. Rip it up and start again. 

Thanks (0)
avatar
By jonspe
07th Jun 2012 11:52

iXBRL

"...there are suggestions that the tax department does not have the skills or staff resources to cope with the vast quantities of data that mandatory filing is producing."

 

Well, what a surprise that is - not.

What is this collective illness that seems to afflict every senior public sector "executive" that increasing complexity somehow equals progress. The more data you acquire the clearer the picture?  Of course it doesn't. That's ok for fractal imaging but it sure ain't any good for an efficient and straightforward tax system.

As usual with the senior civil service and the politicians in government, they are starting from the wrong end. Instead of taking an axe to the tax statutes and rationalising the system making it simpler, fairer, easier to collect and therefore more difficult to avoid/evade, they prefer instead to carry on down the road constructed by the Complexitiser-General Brown and making the system ever more opaque and therefore more difficult (and expensive) to administer.

And this is why Osborne got himself into such a damned mess in the last Budget. Even correcting obvious anomalies such as VAT on what is or what is not hot takeaway food, or the gross abuse of foreign charitable donations by the super rich, become problems of Gordian Knot proportions, instead of straightforward procedural corrections.

I can understand why the senior civil servants want to maintain the complexity of the system - the size of their empires are in inverse proportion to the efficiency of the organisations they command, after all - but, for the life of me, I cannot understand why a so-called Conservative Chancellor allows this situation to continue, and, in fact, deteriorate.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks (0)
Replying to JulieY:
avatar
By david5541
07th Jun 2012 12:43

clerical staff only

jonspe wrote:

"...there are suggestions that the tax department does not have the skills or staff resources to cope with the vast quantities of data that mandatory filing is producing."

 

As usual with the senior civil service and the politicians in government, they are starting from the wrong end. Instead of taking an axe to the tax statutes and rationalising the system making it simpler, fairer, easier to collect and therefore more difficult to avoid/evade, they prefer instead to carry on down the road constructed by the Complexitiser-General Brown and making the system ever more opaque and therefore more difficult (and expensive) to administer.

And this is why Osborne got himself into such a damned mess in the last Budget. Even correcting obvious anomalies such as VAT on what is or what is not hot takeaway food, or the gross abuse of foreign charitable donations by the super rich, become problems of Gordian Knot proportions, instead of straightforward procedural corrections.

I can understand why the senior civil servants want to maintain the complexity of the system - the size of their empires are in inverse proportion to the efficiency of the organisations they command, after all - but, for the life of me, I cannot understand why a so-called Conservative Chancellor allows this situation to continue, and, in fact, deteriorate.

 

"Well, what a surprise that is - not.

What is this collective illness that seems to afflict every senior public sector "executive" that increasing complexity somehow equals progress. The more data you acquire the clearer the picture?  Of course it doesn't. That's ok for fractal imaging but it sure ain't any good for an efficient and straightforward tax system." 

 

the reality on the ground for hmrc is they have millions of ct compliance staff used to checking and manually processing ct 600 forms (some with very long foreign names)who now dont have a job but are supposed to understand  all the fandangled IXBRL "risk assessment" tools now to hand when they are only clerical staff- no wonder they are all about to strike.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks (0)
Replying to JulieY:
avatar
By frustratedwithhmrc
07th Jun 2012 15:58

A hard-line stance towards iXBRL?

jonspe wrote:
 "...there are suggestions that the tax department does not have the skills or staff resources to cope with the vast quantities of data that mandatory filing is producing."

Exactly and on top of this farce we have Real Time Information to look forward to - yet another travesty in the making...

If HMRC was a dog you would put it out of its misery.

Thanks (1)
Replying to Matrix:
avatar
By DMGbus
15th Jun 2012 13:36

The profession has allowed HMRC to do this...

frustratedwithhmrc wrote:

jonspe wrote:
 "...there are suggestions that the tax department does not have the skills or staff resources to cope with the vast quantities of data that mandatory filing is producing."

Exactly and on top of this farce we have Real Time Information to look forward to - yet another travesty in the making...

If HMRC was a dog you would put it out of its misery.

The accountancy profession raised no big gripes with the introduction of iXBRL nor is it making any noises about RTI.

My conclusion is that most of the profession looks forward to making more money at the expense of small business because of the unacceptable added burdens - "iXBRL" - a software NEVER EVER USED BY SMALL BUSINESS yet forced on all small companies; now we have RTI with overly complex and detailed reporting requirements on the horizon.

 

Thanks (0)
By ccassociates
07th Jun 2012 14:35

Surprise

Why are we surprised by this? does their track record not indicate that THEY would not be able to administer it.

I rang some time ago as I was having trouble with a particular return with complex tax computations and was told that I only needed to submit a PDF set of accounts and comps if the turnover ws less than 6.5 million

Once again Govt dictate that our profession lays out major funds to allow us comply with legislation they then change. The whole system is crumbling about their ears they have left their ivory towers and are now firmly in cloud cuckoo land

Lord help us next year when they attempt to admimister Child Benefit via the tax return !!

Thanks (0)
avatar
By southplay
11th Jun 2012 12:06

HMRC free ixbrl software limitations

Hi All

Am I missing something here? It seems that HMRC's software does not cater for a company that has investments or shares in another company. I'm able to do all my small clients on their iXBRL CT600, except for one. Has anyone managed to get around this problem without forking out for VT+ or other?

 

Thanks

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Jayaprakash.M
11th Dec 2012 11:23

Most companies and accounting firms have not yet seen the true benefit of iXBRL. Although this is only used for regulatory purposes now, this is likely to change in due course when iXBRL data can be used for analysis.

Thanks (0)