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

NRCGT return

etf
Posts: 695
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 5:25 pm

Re: NRCGT return

Postby etf » Fri Oct 30, 2020 12:05 pm

embarrassingly-an extra s

etf
Posts: 695
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 5:25 pm

Re: NRCGT return

Postby etf » Sun Nov 01, 2020 9:18 am

My father’s family are descended from blacksmiths. He was a successful heavy weight boxer who once knocked out the British police champion; so not afraid of challenging authority. On the other hand my mother’s family is full of teachers and doctors; hopefully people who are able to analyse facts and make a correct decision.

I provide this background information as perhaps an explanation of why I continue to post on this thread. I’ve been advised to drop this cause because it is old news and has already happened, but I can’t accept that position. Nobody has yet persuaded me from my belief that HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) has treated taxpayers unfairly and for that reason I’ll continue to fight for this cause.

So why is HM Revenue and Customs suddenly unwilling to provide Freedom of Information request information on a timely basis (see previous post on this thread)?

There is a part of HM Revenue and Customs that currently confirms it will treat taxpayers even-handedly (although there are moves to extract that pledge from the Taxpayers Charter-I wonder why?). That is the law and if HMRC treats taxpayers unfairly it is breaking the law.

The Freedom of Information data that I have obtained strongly suggests that HMRC has been breaking the rules of the Taxpayers Charter. From a low base of 3% successful appeals against NRCGT penalties, the figure rose dramatically to 97% successful appeals. These statistics obtained on a quarterly basis suggest HMRC’s assertions that they treat Taxpayers even-handedly are absolute poppycock.

Perhaps HMRC believe if it is permitted to publish these figures in arrears as an annual (rather than quarterly) figure, any fluctuations in the percentage of successful appeals will be better hidden. Certainly, I suspect HMRC appreciates the quarterly Freedom of Information data it has already provided makes its position untenable (but only if it comes under a sustained attack) and for that reason the flow of evidence released going forward will be turned off to just an annual trickle.

One of the key roles of tax journalists, professional bodies and people working in the tax profession generally is to flag when HMRC overstep the mark. Unless they are checked, HMRC will continue to push acceptable boundaries and treat taxpayers unfairly.

I hope someone will either help shine an illuminating light on HMRC’s shady behaviour, or alternatively, flag where my analysis is flawed (go on, prove I did inherit too many blacksmith genes-with apologies to all cerebral blacksmiths out there). Please don’t continue to sit on the fence and allow either me or HMRC to proceed unchecked.

etf
Posts: 695
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 5:25 pm

Re: NRCGT return

Postby etf » Fri Nov 06, 2020 3:43 pm

I think even Donald Trump would baulk at challenging a swing from 3% to 97%.

HMRC less believable than Donald Trump?

etf
Posts: 695
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 5:25 pm

Re: NRCGT return

Postby etf » Fri Nov 20, 2020 6:51 pm

The Ministerial Code/The Taxpayers Charter-not worth the paper they are written on in my opinion.

At least Priti Patel may receive a naughty girl message from Boris. Sir (you heard it here first) Jim Harra's department continues unchecked.....3% to 97 % = even-handed treatment for Taxpayers? No wonder freedom of information requests for further statistics are being refused.

wamstax
Posts: 1931
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 3:39 pm
Location: Operate Nationally but based in Aberdeen
Contact:

Re: NRCGT return

Postby wamstax » Fri Nov 20, 2020 9:01 pm

Yes Ok etf by all means rant and go on a crusade but what are you going to say about the UK tax resident who has to file their CGT return within 30 days of the completion and pay the tax.

Let's be quite frank anybody who is getting involved in the selling of a property (resident or non resident) must at some point think "am I going to have to pay some taxes on this"? Surely that would be the first question of any reasonable person. Or maybe they think that they can get away with it if they get the money and run.

Given the time that it usually takes to put a property on the market and the involvement with legal advisers etc it would appear that somebody must have been careless etc etc. and its not just 30 days that the person has to consider getting their house in order so to speak.

I think that there may well have been a recent Tribunal case covering this very same point so it might be useful for you to carry out some research to see if you are beating a dead goose or have "right" on your side.
regards and hope this helps
http://www.wamstaxltd.com
Operates Nationally with competitive costs
and email and phone contact (mob 07751720507) can be obtained from websites

etf
Posts: 695
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 5:25 pm

Re: NRCGT return

Postby etf » Sat Nov 21, 2020 10:36 am

Hi Wamstax,

Thank you for your feedback which is very welcome.

My point is historical. HMRC is obliged to treat taxpayers even-handedly. They haven't treated taxpayers even-handedly when reviewing NRCGT appeals and when this was pointed out they acted as though everything they have done is perfect...this went right to the top. I have seen identical appeals achieve polar opposite results. HMRC should carry out a proper review and refund the penalties they charged which further down the line they were cancelling.

I'm sure you encourage your clients to do the right thing in fully disclosing their income (I've seen you consistently give this advice). So why are you permitting HMRC to be dishonest?

If you consider my point above has no merit then by all means come back at me full blast.

KR

etf

wamstax
Posts: 1931
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 3:39 pm
Location: Operate Nationally but based in Aberdeen
Contact:

Re: NRCGT return

Postby wamstax » Sat Nov 21, 2020 9:23 pm

At full blast - never. I am sometimes viewed as belligerent but always open to reasoned consideration. HMRC in most cases officers are professional but in “far too many” - one is really too many after all - instances officers will make mistakes and also not see the wood for the trees. That is not to say their behaviour is always deliberate. Sometimes it is careless and sometimes they will make mistakes while taking reasonable care. They are human and to err is human. Ok if you’ve never made a mistake by all means preach to us all but there are safeguards in place if somebody is being out and out wrong. Ultimately of course there is the tribunal but clearly not even they get it right first time.
Sometimes it comes down to how good we are at getting to the facts ( and acquiring the convincing evidence to prove it) and presenting them so that the other side see the errors of their ways. There are never winners when you have to resort to the Tribunal but ultimately if your case is so good then it should be a thoroughly prepared dawdle.
Of course the tribunals can end up with different results for similar as in the cases of Hart - TC06446; Saunders - TC06173 Bradshaw - TC06582
Have you got it styled yet?
regards and hope this helps
http://www.wamstaxltd.com
Operates Nationally with competitive costs
and email and phone contact (mob 07751720507) can be obtained from websites

etf
Posts: 695
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 5:25 pm

Re: NRCGT return

Postby etf » Sun Nov 22, 2020 8:34 am

Hi Wamstax,

Thank you for taking the time to add a further reply.

I am the last person to try and argue that I never make mistakes. By the same token, where I believe HMRC has not observed the Taxpayers Charter (treated taxpayers even-handedly-fairly) and I point this out, I expect HMRC to review the facts and either advise me where my analysis is flawed or hold their hands up and apologise.

I refer back to the much quoted Goochie-gate appeal letter. The information in that short letter was sufficient for the late NRCGT filing penalties to be cancelled to Nil. I had an indentical situation, appealed on the same grounds but HMRC refused to cancel those penalties. I established that Jon Thompson was at the time the person at HMRC responsible for ensuring the Taxpayers Charter is observed. He handed the case to his right hand senior man whose review was so sketchy that he thought I was Goochie's tax adviser-did he even open the file?. I was advised the penalties were properly charged.

Now a bit further down the line, I lodged two further appeals again using the same reasonable excuse and they both resulted in the penalties being cancelled (at the time when HMRC switched from allowing 3% of appeals to allowing 97% of appeals) If those statistics don't scream at you that taxpayers aren't being treated even-handedly nothing will. Put yourself in the situation of the taxpayer who pays a penalty when it is known that taxpayers in identical situations have had their penalties cancelled. It is not fair or equitable and as HMRC are not oberving the Taxpayers Charter they are breaking the law...something you tell your clients they must not do.

KR

etf

PS Tax tribunal case website We’re sorry this site is temporarily unavailable



etf
Posts: 695
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 5:25 pm

Re: NRCGT return

Postby etf » Tue Nov 24, 2020 10:11 am

I would add that HMRC are trying to rip out the pledge contained in the Taxpayers Charter which I believe has been spectacularly ignored .

Even-handed treatment, Even-handed treatment, Even-handed treatment.

Yet another coincidence, or HMRC showing a guilty conscience? When it is gone, it is gone.


Return to “Capital Gains Tax, CGT”