Please find below a blog which you might find of interest from my colleague Cathy Corns, who writes for our sister blog SME Plus...

HMRC has published new guidance on the new penalty provisions that will apply from April 2008.

HMRC states that it has designed the new penalties so that:

• If people take reasonable care when completing their returns they will not be penalised.
• If they do not take reasonable care errors will be penalised, and the penalties will be higher if the error is deliberate.
• Disclosing errors before HMRC find them will substantially reduce any penalty due.

The new penalties initially apply to VAT, PAYE, National Insurance, Capital Gains Tax, Income Tax, Corporation Tax and the Construction Industry Scheme.

Further information can be found at:
http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/about/new-penalties/penalties-leaflet.pdf
http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/about/new-penalties/faqs.htm

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Last year HM Revenue & Customs launched the Offshore Disclosure Facility to enable those with undisclosed interest from offshore bank accounts to come clean and report the omissions and pay the tax, interest and a 10% penalty.

Before the facility closed on 26 November 2007 it was being reported that the facility had not been as successful as the Revenue had hoped.

Today the Revenue are implementing the second phase of the attack on offshore account holders by issuing letter to around 5,000 account holders who did not come forward last time. This time, as well as having to pay the tax and interest the Revenue has stated that any penalty is:

“..unlikely to be less than 30%”

If you are in the position of having undisclosed income you should seek professional advice as soon as possible. Next time it could be the maximum penalty of 100% of the tax or even a criminal investigation.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

My colleague Cathy Corns recently outlined the new penalty regime for both direct and indirect taxes to be introduced next year. This new regime will potentially mean that businesses will face higher penalties for errors in VAT return periods with a due date after 1 April 2009.

Under the current VAT rules, if a business discovers an error before HMRC has begun to make enquiries, it can either make a voluntary disclosure or where the VAT is less than £2,000, it can adjust the amount on the VAT return. By doing so, the 15% misdeclaration penalty (triggered when an error breaches certain thresholds) will automatically be waived. Also, a penalty will not apply where a business can convince HMRC that it has a “reasonable excuse” for the error. Under the new regime, the concept of “reasonable excuse” will no longer be grounds for waiving a penalty.

Instead, HMRC will determine the quantum of a penalty by reference to the amount of VAT at stake, the nature and behaviour of the offence that lead to an understatement of VAT and the extent of the disclosure by the business.

There has been no confirmation so far that VAT errors below £2,000 cannot continue to be adjusted on the VAT return, under the new regime. However, it may prove necessary to write to HMRC to disclose any error, regardless of the size and reason, even when the error can be put on the VAT return. This would avoid the potential for a 30% penalty for making “careless” errors.

Hopefully HMRC will confirm this point nearer the time. Watch this space….

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

HMRC have now issued Business Brief 07/2008 inviting businesses to submit claims for both input tax accrued before 1 May 1997 and also output tax claims for accounting periods prior to 4 December 1996.

There is no time limit for submission of these claims but if you have a claim, prompt action should be taken.

Further announcements are expected.

• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

There have been a number of tax cases recently regarding the question of residence in the UK for tax purposes. In both the Gaines-Cooper and Barrett cases HM Revenue & Customs established that the taxpayers remained resident in the UK. In a recent case heard before the Special Commissioners concerning a British Airways pilot the Revenue were unsuccessful. Full details of the case can be found here.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

A recent decision in the case of Livewire Telecom LON/06/1365 has demonstrated the complexity of VAT fraud cases involving carousel fraud.

The appellant was a wholesale broker (exporter) of mainly new mobile phones. In the course of selling such phones, the company made the relevant checks on both suppliers and customers and the unique phone reference numbers “IMEI”. However, in 2006, HMRC refused to make a significant repayment of input tax on the basis that it suspected that the business was knowingly involved in “contra trading” in respect of 14 transactions. “Contra Trading” involves two separate supply chains, one “clean”, the other “dirty”. The dirty chain will include a “missing trader”. In this case, the appellant was part of the clean chain but HMRC claimed that it was knowingly involved in a carousel fraud.

The tribunal decided, on the evidence available, that the due diligence process of the business appeared to be flawed. However, the appellant could not have (nor ought to have) known of the fraud at the time the transactions took place. Interestingly the tribunal was also critical of the way HMRC presented its evidence and made suggestions as to how this could be improved for future cases.

Other businesses which have had input tax claims refused may now seek millions of pounds of VAT refunds.

HMRC are considering whether to appeal the decision.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Have you had input tax (or output tax) claims capped by HMRC at 3 years? If so, a recent House of Lords Judgement will be of interest to you.

The judgements in two similar cases Conde Nast and Fleming have ruled that the introduction of the 3 year cap with effect from 1 May 1997 was in breach of the principles of Community law as it did not allow the taxpayer a reasonable transitional period in which to submit refund claims. As such it must be disapplied. This opens up the period for submission of old and new claims.

The Lords ruled that a prospective transitional period should now be allowed in order for taxpayers to make claims. Futhermore, as the three year cap has been ruled to be defective, this means that even taxpayers who have not yet submitted claims for input tax incurred before 1 May 1997 will have the opportunity to do so. It is not known how long the transitional period will be, but it could be as short as six months.

Therefore if you have had input tax claims capped in the past, you should now revisit these claims as a matter of priority. When the details of the transitional period are announced, such claims should be re-submitted.

This judgement also calls into question the position following the Marks & Spencer case (relating to overpaid output tax). It may also be possible that the transitional period for output tax claims could be "reopened". Therefore, any output tax claims (overdeclared VAT in the periods prior to 4 December 1996 ) which have been capped by HMRC should also be revisited.

Watch this space for further details...

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Please find below a piece from Cathy Corns posted on our sister blog SME Plus Blog.

HMRC has recently confirmed one very important point on assets that have been owned for a number of years. Such assets will have accrued a substantial amount of indexation relief (over 100% to date on assets held on 31 March 1982). Where an individual owns such assets on 5 April 2008 the indexation relief is irretrievably lost.

However HMRC have now confirmed (http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/cgt/faqs-cgt-reform.htm) that where an asset is transferred to a spouse or civil partner on a no-gain no-loss transfer the indexation relief is captured as part of the new owner’s base cost for tax purposes. This is an important planning possibility.

Regrettably though life in tax is never 100% straightforward – if the original owner would qualify for the new entrepreneurs relief and the new owner would not then the value of the historic indexation has to be compared with the value of the new relief before any transfer is made.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Although January is traditionally the busiest time of year for tax professionals we are eagerly awaiting further details on the proposed changes in the rules for Residence, Domicile and Capital Gains which are rumoured to be available next week.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The BBC are reporting that the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Alistair Darling, is to make a Statement to MPs about a “major operational problem” at HM Revenue & Customs later today.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

There has been further press coverage in the The Times online newspaper over the weekend about the taxation of non domicilaries in the UK.  The debate was sharpened when the director of the CBI, Richard Lambert, raised questions about the fairness or otherwise of the UK’s tax laws.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks