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

Settlement vs. Commissioners

mknight
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 3:31 pm

Postby mknight » Tue Jan 17, 2006 3:12 pm

After an enquiry of almost 3 years, I am at the stage where my negotiations with the Inland Revenue are heading towards agreement of a settlement figure. In the meantime, I have received the latest round of (revised) notices of hearing for the General Commissioners.

The notices list all the amounts I've appealed against and I've realised that these amounts add up to less than what the Revenue are trying to settle at.

Does this mean that, if I pay the amounts which are being sought in the tax appeal notices, then the whole matter will be done and dusted for an amount less than the settlement offer?

King_Maker
Posts: 6538
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 3:22 pm

Postby King_Maker » Wed Jan 18, 2006 12:47 am

But the Settlement figure may include interest and penalties?

And/or HMRC will ask the Commissioners to increase the amounts under appeal.

mknight
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 3:31 pm

Postby mknight » Wed Jan 18, 2006 7:21 am

Thanks for your reply King Maker.
After posting, I did consider interest and penalty.

The Revenue are offering a settlement figure without any penalty.

I add took the interest portion out of that offer and added it to the total amounts sought under appeal. It still comes out to less. I'm a bit puzzled.

Also, why if the Revenue are seeking x amount (against which I appeal) should they seek to increase that to x+y when it goes to the Commissioners? Seems plainly unreasonable.

King_Maker
Posts: 6538
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 3:22 pm

Postby King_Maker » Wed Jan 18, 2006 8:12 am

I assume the original assessment(s) are estimated?

mknight
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 3:31 pm

Postby mknight » Wed Jan 18, 2006 10:52 am

Yes. The first assessments were quite a while ago (2yrs+) and have since been revised due to numerous errors in the estimation. Over the period of enquiry, each time a notice of appeal hearing was issued, it would be postponed due to ongoing negotiations/correspondence and another date would be issued.

There is still no agreement upon the estimates.

The settlement offer, as you would expect, is to bring the lengthy enquiry to a conclusion.

King_Maker
Posts: 6538
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 3:22 pm

Postby King_Maker » Thu Jan 19, 2006 12:25 am

It is yor prerogative to have the Commissioners settle the quantum of the assessment - I am assuming the (main) problem has been in establishing that, rather than a technical tax aspect?

If so, I doubt whether you will end up with a lower assessment(s) by this method.

Not an option I would recommend - but I don't have all the facts.


Return to “Tax Investigations and Enquiries”