What was it about the particular circumstances and attributes of Goochie's situation detailed in his accountant's appeal letter that allowed his NRCGT penalties to be cancelled whereas Dr Wong had to pay up? The accountant's letter is very short and concise and so shouldn't take long to analyse.
There has been a deafening silence to my question above. I therefore presume nearly everyone agrees HMRC has not dealt with taxpayers even-handedly
when dealing with NRCGT appeals. This means they are not adhering to the Taxpayers Charter.
The paragraphs below suggest HMRC can be persuaded to review matters when they sugar things up (why do cost constraints...an excuse used by Mr Thompson when I asked him to review the reasons why HMRC accepted 771 NRCGT appeals...not stop this review taking place?....another example of HMRC's uneven playing field behaviour?)
HMRC has announced that it is reviewing cases where a ‘Failure to Notify’ penalty was issued for the tax years 2013 to 2014, 2014 to 2015, and 2015 to 2016, to customers who did not register for the High Income Child Benefit Charge.
The department will review cases for these years and issue penalty refunds if it finds the customer had a reasonable excuse for not meeting their tax obligation.
A reasonable excuse is something that stopped someone from meeting a tax obligation which they took appropriate care to meet. Decisions on what constitutes a reasonable excuse are based on an objective assessment of individual circumstances.
Normally customers have to explain why they have a reasonable excuse, however following feedback HMRC is proactively reviewing these cases.
I look forward to reading a similar announcement concerning NRCGT penalties. Adopting Goochie's ruling, a penalty refund bonanza will surely result. Mr Thompson of HMRC, the ball is in your court.