header-logo header-logo

30 June 2017
Issue: 7752 / Categories: Features , Tax
printer mail-detail

Taxing matters

nlj_7752_vaines

Peter Vaines tackles penalties, prison & other principal residences

  • Failure to submit a zero return.
  • Doing time: an unexpected or unusual event?
  • New twist on principal private residence.

The case of Kaczmarczyk v HMRC TC 5744 has some hair-raising implications. Mr Kaczmarczyk was issued with a tax return but he did not send it back because he had no taxable income or gains for the year. However, HMRC still imposed a penalty of £3,500 for failing to submit a zero return. Their grounds derived from s 8 of TMA 1970, which says that the taxpayer ‘may be required by a notice given to him by an officer of the Board to make and deliver to the officer a return containing such information as may reasonably be required in pursuance of the notice’.

The tribunal held that upon receipt by a person of a notice under s 8, the recipient has an obligation to file a tax return for the year—and failure to do so gives rise to a penalty under Sch 55 of the Finance

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

Withers—Sophie Barrett-Brown

Withers—Sophie Barrett-Brown

Withers drives further growth in its UK immigration team with new partner Sophie Barrett-Brown

Venus Legal—Esther Amoako

Venus Legal—Esther Amoako

Venus Legal invests in next generation of legal talent as specialist litigation practice grows

Fisher Phillips—Catrina Smith

Fisher Phillips—Catrina Smith

Fisher Phillips continues momentum in London with arrival of Catrina Smith

NEWS
Restrictions on workplace non-disclosure agreements could make settlements slower, more complex and more expensive when reforms expected in 2027 take effect
Private prosecutors face closer scrutiny under Crown Prosecution Service guidance designed to strengthen accountability and consistency when intervention is requested
Foreign states cannot necessarily claim immunity for cyber operations launched abroad against computers in Britain, following a divided Supreme Court ruling
Defendants who make unsupported complaints about their lawyers risk losing legal aid while confiscation proceedings continue without representation
Lawyers advising Russian clients face different sanctions restrictions across the UK, EU and US, despite their shared objective of increasing pressure on Russia
back-to-top-scroll