| Home > Tax Articles > General > HMRC: A Helping Hand? |
| HMRC: A Helping Hand? |
|
|
|
Mark McLaughlin CTA (Fellow) ATT TEP considers whether advice and rulings from HMRC are as helpful as they seem. IntroductionPractitioners will no doubt be painfully aware that tax law (and its application in practice) is full of uncertainties and ‘grey areas’. However, there are probably more opportunities than ever before to obtain clearances and rulings from HMRC on the tax treatment of various transactions. These include:
Of course, it is important that applications for advice, rulings and clearances are properly made. It is equally important that HMRC’s response is retained on file and, if given verbally, is immediately recorded in writing. Verbal adviceVAT Notice 700/6 poses the question “What is the best way to get advice?” It then states:
The recent VAT case Corkteck Limited v HMRC [2009] EWHC 785 (Admin) underlines the limitations in the reliability of advice given verbally by HMRC, and the importance of keeping a record of what was actually said. In that case, the company’s director contacted HMRC’s National Advice Service (NAS) about the correct VAT treatment of certain transactions, which the company subsequently treated as zero-rated. During a subsequent VAT inspection, it came to light that the wrong VAT treatment had been applied. As a result, Corkteck was assessed for VAT of over £315,000, plus interest and a surcharge. Unfortunately, the director’s account of the telephone conversation differed from the notes made by the HMRC officer’s computer note, which was apparently made during or immediately after the conversation. The Court therefore had to consider whether to accept the director’s recollection of the conversation with the HMRC officer, or whether it preferred as evidence the written note of the conversation by the HMRC officer. The Court held that the written note was the best evidence of what was actually said in the conversation. The taxpayer’s appeal was therefore dismissed. Perhaps more significantly, the Court held that even if the taxpayer’s account of the conversation with the NAS officer had been accepted, it could not reasonably be relied upon. Sales J said: “The NAS was only held out as a source of “general advice”…rather than as a source of binding rulings on the proper tax treatment of specific transactions.” The Court ruled that verbal advice from HMRC would only be binding in “very exceptional circumstances”. The moral of this case is that obtaining verbal advice from HMRC is probably best avoided if at all possible, or otherwise should be followed up in writing. Non-statutory business clearancesThe ‘Non-statutory clearances service for HMRC business customers’ was originally launched on 1 April 2008. HMRC’s stated aim is that the service should provide certainty for businesses and their advisers “…where there is demonstrable material uncertainty about the tax consequences of transactions affecting their business.” My practical experiences of using this service have been largely positive. However, from my discussions with practitioners, applications for non-statutory clearances have seemingly not been widely made since the facility was introduced. This is slightly surprising, although part of the reason may be a lack of awareness by practitioners as to the availability and scope of the service. Of course, applying for clearance can be something of a double-edged sword. The facility is all well and good if HMRC’s clearance is favourable. Unfortunately, taxpayers or practitioners who do not obtain the response from HMRC that they were hoping for are largely stuck with it. There is no general right of appeal against advice or clearances, except in certain specific circumstances provided in statute. Follow the instructionsWhichever type of advice, ruling or clearance is sought from HMRC, it is important to closely follow the relevant HMRC guidance on making the application, such as the format and content of statutory clearance applications. The guidance will also invariably state the specific circumstances in which HMRC will (and will not) be bound by a particular ruling or clearance application. Applications should be drafted very carefully. Practitioners should follow the principle established in R v Inland Revenue Commissioners, ex p. MFK Underwriting Agencies Ltd ([1989] STC 873) that the taxpayer “…should have put all his cards face upwards on the table”. It goes without saying that if an application is materially incomplete or incorrect, any clearance or ruling given by HMRC on the basis of that application cannot be relied upon.
|
|||
|
About The Author ![]() Mark McLaughlin is TaxationWeb's Co-Founder, Director and Technical Editor. He is a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Taxation and a member of the Association of Taxation Technicians and the Society of Trust and Estate Practitioners. He lectures on tax subjects, is co-author of Tottel's IHT Annual and Ray & McLaughlin's IHT Planning, and Editor of Tottel's Tax Planning and Annual series. Mark's work has also been published in Taxation, Tax Adviser, Tolley's Practical Tax, Tax Journal and Simon's Weekly Tax Intelligence. Since January 1998, Mark has been a consultant in his own tax practice, Mark McLaughlin Associates, which provides tax consultancy and support services to professional firms. He publishes a regular 'Tax Update' e-Newsletter for clients and other professional firms. To receive future copies, contact Mark via his website. |
|||
|
Article Added Saturday, 12 September 2009 | 1496 Hits |
|||
















