This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. To find out more about cookies on this website and how to delete cookies, see our Cookie Policy.
Analytics

Tools which collect anonymous data to enable us to see how visitors use our site and how it performs. We use this to improve our products, services and user experience.

Essential

Tools that enable essential services and functionality, including identity verification, service continuity and site security.

Where Taxpayers and Advisers Meet

Another S9A fishing exercise with a twisted hook

Milbo
Posts: 44
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 4:07 pm

Another S9A fishing exercise with a twisted hook

Postby Milbo » Tue Feb 13, 2018 12:08 pm

Hi all,

Another S9A enquiry but this time, whilst correctly addressed to Mr T, the schedule of information and documents request was addressed to Mr N with a different case reference.

I'm presuming that HMRC will hide behnd SALF403 which states "the only condition that the officer of the Board must satisfy before commencing an enquiry is that he must give the taxpayer written notice of his intention to enquire into the tax return" when I question the validity of the notice. There is also a clear data breach, maybe two if Mr N has received the info request for Mr T.

Has anyone had a similar experience?

Now the fishing exercise, HMRC have requested a list of all land and property owned in the UK or overseas during the tax year, whether let or not, whether owned jointly or solely, directly or indirectly.

Any properties owned but not let do not have any relevance to the entries on the tax return, none were acquired or sold during the year either, so I am tempted to challenge the request. Any thoughts?

Milbo

wamstax
Posts: 1836
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 3:39 pm
Location: Operate Nationally but based in Aberdeen
Contact:

Re: Another S9A fishing exercise with a twisted hook

Postby wamstax » Tue Feb 13, 2018 12:31 pm

Yes unfortunately HMRC have a habit of copying and pasting past communications and from time to time they forget to change the name of the previous innocent (or guilty) party. If the client name on the S9A “intention to enquire notice is clear then I am afraid the notice is valid.

As regards the second part of the notice - what breach is there in fact? Can you identify the other individual concerned and in any case the schedule is a request for information so it tells you nothing. As they plaster over all their letters their information may be incorrect or misleading.

As regards challenging - are you 100% sure that there is no reason for such an enquiry and has your client thought carefully why they should be asking such a question For example has he evaded tax in past and may be HMRC way of attempting to get to the irregularity they see exists but cannot pinpoint it.

Of course as you suggest they could just be fishing in which case they need to be taught a lesson that it is not the way to conduct S9A enquiries
regards and hope this helps
http://www.wamstaxltd.com
Operates Nationally with competitive costs
and email and phone contact can be obtained from website


Return to “Tax Investigations and Enquiries”