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
Editorial: Business Record Checks A Fine-Gathering Process
03/12/2011, by Mark McLaughlin CTA (Fellow) ATT TEP, Tax Articles - General
1833 views
5
Rate:
Rating: 5/5 from 1 people

Anthony Margaritelli, chairman of the ICPA, questions HM Revenue & Customs' intentions regarding Business Records Checks.

Taxationweb readers were recently treated to a guest editorial by HMRC’s Director of Local Compliance Richard Summersgill  ( Keeping Business Records ) stating how keeping good records is a win-win practice for businesses and the taxman.

From the article one could almost believe, I did say “almost believe”, that HMRC was doing this for the good of the business because “Good record-keeping give businesses a clear idea of their trading position and profitability” so of course these visits were all about how their staff could improve the records to help the proprietor and of course this could all be done by their staff in a couple of hours, not said but certainly implied.

Get real.

We all know what the BRC is about and we actually get the real answer late on in the article: “We are looking at options to encourage businesses to improve their records including sanctions such as penalties”.

Now lest we forget the taxpayer at the time of the visit has not under-declared their income nor overstated their expenses. They are not part of the black economy because they have declared their business activities else of course how would HMRC know they are in business? They may just keep records in a way that HMRC simply either don’t understand or frankly don’t like based upon their own limited experience.

HMRC have to close the tax gap, this we know, and we also know that HMRC are doing this by an ever increasing raft of fines, penalties and surcharges and this BRC is another one of those. This particular fine gathering process is the most invidious because it purports to be something it isn’t. BRC hides behind a screen purporting to help the business when in reality it simply is an investigation by another name.

Bookeeping cannot be a “one size fits all” option because no two businesses even in similar industries are the same. This is why accountants spend many hours with their clients sorting out systems that fit the circumstances. We do not have the luxury of stating “We do not seek to be prescriptive as to the form in which the records are kept”. For many small business the annual accounting process undertaken by the accountant forms part of their bookkeeping system and to look to criticise and penalise the system NOT the results after they have been declared on a Tax Return, etc., is disingenuous.

So each visit is to take approx 2-3 hours so no real cost to the business that has done nothing wrong is there? Do HMRC really believe this?

Fines and penalties are never going to win popularity contests but they should be understandable and exact, to be fined by some subjective logic that the end result MAY NOT result in the correct tax paid shows HMRC in its present day true colours.

Someone somewhere at HMRC has worked out that they don’t win enough tax enquiry cases, it’s not cost efficient to try to track down the black economy and that the tax gap is unlikely to be closed during recessionary periods. The result appears to be that fines and penalties are the way forward and if we can render a fine based on a subjective and one sided view even better.

Accountants everywhere need to ensure they attend these checks with their clients and we need to question HMRC staff on their experience and qualifications in such matters, we need frankly to stand up and be counted.

About The Author

Mark McLaughlin is a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Taxation, a Fellow of the Association of Taxation Technicians, and a member of the Society of Trust and Estate Practitioners. From January 1998 until December 2018, Mark was a consultant in his own tax practice, Mark McLaughlin Associates, which provided tax consultancy and support services to professional firms throughout the UK.

He is a member of the Chartered Institute of Taxation’s Capital Gains Tax & Investment Income and Succession Taxes Sub-Committees.

Mark is editor and a co-author of HMRC Investigations Handbook (Bloomsbury Professional).

Mark is Chief Contributor to McLaughlin’s Tax Case Review, a monthly journal published by Tax Insider.

Mark is the Editor of the Core Tax Annuals (Bloomsbury Professional), and is a co-author of the ‘Inheritance Tax’ Annuals (Bloomsbury Professional).

Mark is Editor and a co-author of ‘Tax Planning’ (Bloomsbury Professional).

He is a co-author of ‘Ray & McLaughlin’s Practical IHT Planning’ (Bloomsbury Professional)

Mark is a Consultant Editor with Bloomsbury Professional, and co-author of ‘Incorporating and Disincorporating a Business’.

Mark has also written numerous articles for professional publications, including ‘Taxation’, ‘Tax Adviser’, ‘Tolley’s Practical Tax Newsletter’ and ‘Tax Journal’.

Mark is a Director of Tax Insider, and Editor of Tax Insider, Property Tax Insider and Business Tax Insider, which are monthly publications aimed at providing tax tips and tax saving ideas for taxpayers and professional advisers. He is also Editor of Tax Insider Professional, a monthly publication for professional practitioners.

Mark is also a tax lecturer, and has featured in online tax lectures for Tolley Seminars Online.

Mark co-founded TaxationWeb (www.taxationweb.co.uk) in 2002.

Back to Tax Articles
Comments

Please register or log in to add comments.

There are not comments added