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

Upper tribunal slaps HMRC for overreaching

by

The UT has ruled the FTT can review whether notices and penalties have been validly issued, but a computer can issue valid documents if it is acting under the instruction of an HMRC officer.

24th Feb 2020
Save content
Have you found this content useful? Use the button above to save it to your profile.

In October 2018, I wrote about the case of Nigel Rogers where the first tier tribunal (FTT) struck out penalties because HMRC could not provide evidence that “an officer of HMRC” had issued the filing notices. I suggested the requirement for a flesh and blood officer could be removed from the legislation altogether, and that is exactly what HMRC is now proposing.

Retrospective change

In October 2019, HMRC issued a technical note to affirm its view of the law with the promise that legislation would be introduced in the next Finance Bill to put matters beyond doubt. This legislation will apply with prospective effect, and also retrospectively to all non-settled cases prior to 31 October 2019.

HMRC’s appeal

Meanwhile, Rogers’ case proceeded to the upper tribunal (UT), where the flesh and blood officer issue was just one of the matters under dispute.

Register for free to continue reading

It’s 100% free and provides unlimited access to the latest accounting news, advice and insight every day. As well as access to this exclusive article, you can:


Content lock down, tick icon

View all AccountingWEB content


Content lock down, tick icon

Comment on articles


Content lock down, tick icon

Watch our digital shows and more

Access content now

Already have an account?

Replies (3)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
By chronus
25th Feb 2020 09:21

Long ago, in days of old, there once lived a body of men and women, of real blood and flesh, the Tax Commissioners, whose job was to ensure fair treatment of tax payers by an organisation that had a real face, the face of the real blood and flesh of its District Tax Inspectors of the Inland Revenue. The latter has now been replaced by a computer and the former is law made of nothing but 24 carat pure gold.
And here is what we now have:
https://youtu.be/WOdjCb4LwQY

Thanks (0)
avatar
By whitevanman
25th Feb 2020 11:14

In many ways a triumph for common sense.
The guidance re future cases is also to be welcomed but I do wonder to what extent bullet 5 will simply be used by some FTT judges as an excuse to conduct their own enquiry into issues not raised by either party (thus continuing uncertainty). Only time will tell.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By MartinLevin
26th Feb 2020 10:34

I recall when corresponding with solicitors - or other legally trained people (including the Law Society itself) - that if a letter did not contain an ORIGINAL signature, that the letter was cursorily dismissed as "not being a legally
admissible document"

Thanks (0)