Oh dear it seems that, despite the fact that Pacesetter is meant to solve all of HMRC's problems, HMRC is still having problems with PAYE codes.
In fact, according to UHY Hacker Young, the problems are so widespread that one in four taxpayers may be presented with the wrong tax bill with pensioners and higher-rate taxpayers most at risk (seemingly two thirds of pensioners on the wrong tax code overpaid their tax).
However, it's not all bad news:
1 RTI, which is guaranteed to be up and running on time, will solve all of this, and
2 HMRC don't recognise the figures used by UHY
A spokesman for HMRC is quoted in the Telegraph:
“We don’t recognise any of the numbers cited.Please feel free to comment if you have been incorrectly coded. In the event the list is long enough I will send it to UHY and HMRC.
Accuracy of PAYE coding notices on the basis of information we hold is 98 per cent.
Most people are paying the right tax.
If any agent has information about their clients’ changed circumstances they should let us know.”
Tax does have to be taxing.
Professional Cover Against the Threat of Costly TAX and VAT Investigations
What is TAXWISE?
TAXWISE is a tax-fee protection service that will pay up to £75,000 towards your accountant's fees in the event of an HM Revenue & Customs full enquiry or dispute.
To find out more, please use this link Taxwise
Tax Investigation for Dummies, by Nick Morgan, provides a good and easy to read guide for anyone caught up in an HMRC tax investigation. A must read for any Self Assessment taxpayer.
Click the link to read about: Tax Investigation for Dummies
HMRC Is Shite (www.hmrcisshite.com), also available via the domain www.hmrconline.com, is brought to you by www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"
Well, in an office with six employees only 4 had incorrect code numbers which were SO wrong they were ridiculous. Three of us were given a D0 code which means no personal allowance and 40% tax deduction.
ReplyDeleteOn investigation, (this is an accountantcy practice), we were told there was a known problem where records of employments were duplicated. The officer we spoke to seemed very aware of this as a problem and made the changes, deleting the spurious employment record and putting us back on the correct codes. However, an ordinary member of the public would not know WHAT was happening, just that they were chronically short of money. This was a few weeks ago but is STILL HAPPENING. I had another case today.
I have no idea if HMRC are doing something to fix this but in the meantime the tax take must be 'up' and they keep saying they are short of money........
"I have no idea if HMRC are doing something to fix this"
DeleteNot a lot, my partner changed jobs at the begining of the year and had to call HMRC because their previous employer screwed up and they had a problem with their coding. The best bit is that the previous employer was guess who? you guessed it HMRC.
So when the folks around here shout and ball because the "joe public" cause the problems just spare a thought. Maybe it is HMRC screwing it all up after all.
I should have added above that part of the problem was that HMRC still had my partner down as working for them, so I guess the stories about dodgy record keeping within HMRC are true after all.
DeleteI unfortunately work for these morons and know of numerous cases of people leaving or even being dismissed but who continue to get paid for years. They make Laurel & Hardy look good....
ReplyDelete"I should have added above that part of the problem was that HMRC still had my partner down as working for them"
ReplyDeleteIn which case it's the fault of his new employer for not notifying HMRC. People's records stay under the old employer *until and unless* the new employer submits the employee's P45/P46.
"[I] know of numerous cases of people leaving or even being dismissed but who continue to get paid for years."
Can you find out what the trick is with that? A lot of us would like to know...
"In which case it's the fault of his new employer for not notifying HMRC. People's records stay under the old employer *until and unless* the new employer submits the employee's P45/P46"
DeleteBut shouldn't the old employer also submit a P45 to show them leaving, then without a P46/P45 from the new employer the record should actually show them as not working anywhere!
"But shouldn't the old employer also submit a P45 to show them leaving, then without a P46/P45 from the new employer the record should actually show them as not working anywhere!"
DeleteIt will be sitting in a mail room somewhere in the UK.
As P45s & P46s are submitted electronically, I don't think the mail room can be blamed on thi one!
Deletei worked for them until 1978 I wonder if a claim for back-pay would succeed? :D
ReplyDelete