header-logo header-logo

06 January 2011 / Peter Vaines
Issue: 7447 / Categories: Features , Tax , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Taxing matters

Peter Vaines recounts a tale of appeals out of time

The case of R Legg TC/2010/04462 indicates that it is generally not in your interests to ignore communications from HMRC. No surprise there—but this will make your hair stand on end.

Mr Legg was contacted by HMRC who suggested that he was party to a bank account which had been credited with £3,000 interest. Mr Legg ignored it. How much tax do you think HMRC could possibly charge as a result? How about £275,000. You may laugh—and although Mr Legg thought this was a joke and “was waiting for Jeremy Beadle to appear” he should have done something because the result was a statutory demand to make him bankrupt. He made an application to the Tribunal to appeal out of time but they said: “It is not in the public interest for this matter to proceed; the amount of tax is large and an early resolution of the matter and the payment of the tax is now appropriate”.

How on earth do HMRC get

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde Co strengthens energy transition and construction offering with hire of Suriya Ashok

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit appoints rare dual-qualified lawyer to expand Anglo-French private wealth expertise

NEWS
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’

Safety fears do not automatically justify shutting an interested person out of a statutory will application

Consumer credit law is heading for its biggest shake-up in 50 years, with the Consumer Credit Act 1974 set to yield much of its detailed statutory machinery to FCA rules
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
back-to-top-scroll