You might also be interested in
Replies (11)
Please login or register to join the discussion.
I referred a penalty case to the FTT
HMRC backed down once I actually referred it to the FTT. It did make me think that they knew we had a good case but they would only back down when we showed we really meant it. And of course, because they withdrew the penalty it does not show as a success by us at tribunal.
If you think you have a good case, go for it.
Smart Polymers "lack of persistence"
The man tried to resolve the problem for 7 months without success. Some would say that persevering with phoning the HMRC helplines for that long was superhuman persistence. Do they really think that, HMRC having proved incompetent at resolving the technical issue in that time, it is unreasonable for a businessman to prefer to devote his time to his business instead? The lack of contact with HMRC between 10 December 2012 and 8 May 2013 at a time when the appellant knew the matter was unresolved does show a lack of persistence...
Not all decisions are published
so the ones that are may be skewed towards the cases that lose on reasonable excuse.
If HMRC lose a case and don't want to take it further then unless the victorious appellant were to ask for it full reasons will not be given and the case will not be published.
HMRC Blocking Publication of Lost Cases?
If HMRC lose a case and don't want to take it further then unless the victorious appellant were to ask for it full reasons will not be given and the case will not be published.
Really? I have won cases that have subsequently been published.
We had success with one previously stayed behind HOK
Even though our client had remitted PAYE each month he never considered himself, as a director, to be an employee and subsequently did not file a P35. The FTT accepted that he had made an honest mistake and presumably felt that it would be unfair to punish him for this. The penalty at stake was £900.
We note that HMRC attempted to prevent our client having a personal hearing on the basis that the initial appeal was a made on the basis of Hok. The hearing as allowed and the client successful, perseverance will always be required when challenging HMRC
Best for the country?
I wonder how many small businesses have stopped employing people because of HMRC's attitude and the onerous RTI legislation and penalty regime that is now with us? Or even shut up shop completely?
Not everyone has the moral or physical strength and endurance to take on HMRC. For every one that wins, how many quietly pay up and stop trading?
I cannot believe that this is the best way forward for our country - I just wish the politicians would wake up to the fact.
Politicians
I cannot believe that this is the best way forward for our country - I just wish the politicians would wake up to the fact.
They don't; that is not what they are there for. They are there to financially enrich themselves as much as possible as quickly as possible.
Best for the Country
I think the current problems, including RTI, will be nothing compared to
the complexity of auto enrolement for pensions.
I do PAYE for about 18 clients, and used to view it as easy money.
However, with RTI and Auto enrolement, I am considering to stop offering this as a service.
Auto enrolment for amall employers
Hear Hear!
Absolutely dreading onset of AE.
How can small businesses plan ahead to figure out if they are making enough to afford to continue trading when this kicks in when they are not allowed to ask staff in advance for an indication of who will opt in (or who will opt out)?
I have some businesses who are only breaking even at present and only one of the two directors is taking any pay. What will they do if all their 20 non-eligible "low-paid" part-time staff decide they want to opt in? There is no money for this.
And which of the staff will self-train off the DWP website and then administer AE - to record that the staff all had the correct paperwork. There is no staff idle time available. And where will the employer keep all this extra paperwork - there is no physical space.
And how will the Pensions Regulator cover or justify their own admin costs incurred chasing up small oblivious employers for paltry amounts unless they recoup some of their costs by charging utterly disproportionate penalties (as now for PAYE late returns and £10/day by stealth for SA).
While I am sympathetic to the concept of simplification, I feel proportionality of penalties urgently needs to be reviewed across the board if we are to believe that the purpose of tax penalties [arising due to non-compliance] is to encourage compliance rather then to collect additional revenue for HMG. A tax compliance fine should NEVER exceed the tax debt, not least because there is likely to be an inability to pay and collection costs will then be high.
Revenue generation by stealth
I have a client who has just been notified that he owes £500 for the non filing of an EC Sales List. This was for one EC sales invoice that wasn't notified because the former director had had a stroke. This is a case where there is no loss of tax to the Revenue. They say that the company had been notified that penalties would start to be levied but there is no trace of this letter. As my client scans ALL incoming documents, this is a little odd.
The point is that, if HMRC want to notify a client that fines are about to be levied and that they will be making no further communication until the fine has reached some sort of arbitrary tipping point, shouldn't the original letter be sent by recorded delivery.
Apparently, of all small subcontractors registered for CIS, 75% have received at least one fine. When RTI really kicks in, isn't this going to reflect similar results. And as regards Auto Enrollment, isn't this a tax increase by stealth.
Politicians of all stripe come into the game and promise they will reduce red tape. Then proceed to increase it on a logarithmic scale. Given that 80% of businesses in this country are small owner managed businesses, isn't it about time they got off their backs. These people only want to earn a living and hopefully provide jobs for others. Yet they get treated like criminals.
haven't you got
the message yet. Politicians and financial institutions don't want small business. In the next 10 years there will be no self-employed or one man band business. The powers that be are making it too difficult to trade.
I have often said best we all go to work and let government give us pocket money.