Save content
Have you found this content useful? Use the button above to save it to your profile.
Making tax claim
iStock_shih-wei_tax_rebate

Awareness key to solving repayment agent issues

by

Requiring repayment agents to formally register with HMRC might solve some of the current issues around claims. But guiding taxpayers through a simple online process could reduce the number of people seeking help from these agents in the first place.

7th Jul 2022
Save content
Have you found this content useful? Use the button above to save it to your profile.

A few weeks ago, I suggested that HMRC should be more proactive in helping taxpayers to make routine claims. I had in mind the kind of claims that high volume agents (HVAs) make, such as for marriage allowance and employment-related expenses.

I mentioned the use of deeds of assignment by HVAs, the high levels of commission they often take on claims and referred to some research that HMRC had commissioned. On 22 June, HMRC published a new consultation on the topic: protecting customers claiming tax repayments.

While recognising that repayment agents can provide a useful service to taxpayers, the new consultation highlights several issues: the use of deeds of assignment; taxpayers not being fully aware of the terms and conditions to which they are agreeing (or indeed that they are dealing with a third party and not HMRC); and the large number of ineligible claims made by some repayment agents.

Some of these issues are matters of consumer protection, such as ensuring that people understand exactly what is being provided, by whom and at what cost. I was prompted to write my last article after looking at a repayment agent website with an eligibility checker that gave factually incorrect answers. My suspicion was not that the checker was wrong due to the incompetence of its designers but that it was deliberately designed to put off potential claimants who might not fit the repayment agent’s business model.

That business model is sometimes best described as speculative, with claims submitted based on an incomplete picture of the taxpayer’s position, leaving it to HMRC to check the detail. HMRC is understandably concerned and cites instances where more than half of claims submitted by repayment agents have not had any repayment due. It has to date temporarily suspended eight agents, preventing the submission of nearly 400,000 ineligible claims.  

Assignment complaints

While assignments cannot include future tax years, they have often been used to enable repayment agents to receive refunds they did not actually facilitate and to profit from work they were not involved in. In the year to March 2022 HMRC received over 350 formal complaints that explicitly referred to assignments. Although HMRC now only processes assignments relating to tax for the relevant year, that does not completely resolve the issue. Unlike a nomination, a taxpayer cannot unilaterally withdraw from an assignment.

HMRC sets out three options in the consultation: prohibiting assignment of tax repayments; prescribing a format for assignments relating to tax repayments to include a clearly worded consumer protection message; requiring formal agreement to the assignment for it to be valid. HMRC says that the third option would be challenging to implement and may not address the root cause of the problem. 

The Low Incomes Tax Reform Group (LITRG) welcomed the publication of the consultation but urged HMRC to take further action now, including greater scrutiny of deeds of assignment to ensure that they are valid.

Consumer protection

HMRC has previously worked with the Advertising Standards Authority and says that it will refer any repayment agents it believes are breaching advertising standards or consumer rights rules to the relevant bodies. It is also proposing to include engagement terms (and specifically transparency around fees) when refreshing the standard for agents.

There is however a more fundamental issue: repayment agents do not have to be formally registered with HMRC as agents in order to submit claims and receive repayments when they operate solely using paper forms. That also makes it difficult for HMRC to monitor and address instances of high volumes of claims where no repayment is due. HMRC is therefore considering a requirement for all repayment agents to formally register with HMRC (and as part of that process to provide details of directors, trading address, company registration number and anti-money laundering supervisor).

One option proposed in the consultation is to require repayment agents to sign up for an agent services account. Another is to require formal authorisation by clients via a 64-8 or through the online authorisation service.

Better outcomes

The impact assessment attached to the consultation says that around 500,000 individuals use repayment agents annually. If online reviews are to be believed, many are happy with the service they receive. But others are put off claiming through incorrect information, or charged fees they did not expect or understand through a mixture of poor information and use of assignments. Many claims are speculative and these waste HMRC’s time and resources, resulting in delays for genuine claimants and their professional advisers.

Clearer information, restrictions on the use of assignments and registration of repayment agents would all help improve this area of the market. But I still believe that HMRC should be more proactive in raising awareness of the potential for claims and then guiding taxpayers through a simple, free, online process to secure their refund. 

And I would echo what AWEB members said in response to that last article: many people are still not aware that they can sign up for a personal digital tax account or what it can do for them. Greater awareness could reduce the number of people seeking help from repayment agents in the first place.

Replies (4)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
By Paul Crowley
07th Jul 2022 16:57

64-8 system and aggresive MLA requirements from HMRC would close this issue.
Better still would be simplifcation of the tax system: do away with MA and stop PAYE expense claims.
If WE&N employer pays
Stop all taxpayers subsidising bad employers

Thanks (3)
Replying to Paul Crowley:
avatar
By Hugo Fair
07th Jul 2022 20:16

100%
It's insane that the vulnerable aren't protected from the unregistered & unregulated, whilst those who are interested in 'doing things right' have to pay for the effort & costs of compliance.

To the gullible it's like being offered a free lottery ticket ... no risk + no cost + no effort, what's not to like from their point of view. They deserve protection.

Thanks (2)
avatar
By Hugo Fair
07th Jul 2022 19:47

A tad disingenuous when you say "I would echo what AWEB members said in response to that last article: many people are still not aware that they can sign up for a personal digital tax account or what it can do for them."

Only two Aweb members - predominantly me - mentioned the PTA in that article; and the takeaway was that (out of 89 surveyed) ... 71 couldn't imagine the purpose and 8 fell asleep (or went home). Not exactly a ringing endorsement of a frustrated desire to use the PTA!

Thanks (3)
By ireallyshouldknowthisbut
08th Jul 2022 09:49

I have a number of clients who are AWARE of the PTA, but are UNABLE to access it.

For example those without a UK passport. Not all natives have one, and many non-nationals retain their original passport or are ineligible for one, but still have taxes to pay.

Despite Brexit stopping most flows of highly skilled internationally mobile workers, many do so exist. I have quite a large population of them on my client base as I am close to a big university and scientific committee.

Other clients are excluded from the basic "not bright enough with computers" to lot into one. Or the "insufficient digital footprint" as I had recently for a very well to do lady with family money (the income on which needed to be reported) but no debt, job or passport. Computer said no.

Thanks (1)