HMRC has found a very nice little earner wrt its accelerated payment notices (APNs) scheme, which extracted £1.3bn from taxpayers and SMEs in 2016/17.
APN's are more than a little controversial, as they give HMRC the power to demand tax it believes it is owed before the dispute is adjudicated. Those affected have only 90 days to pay the sum, and have no right of appeal.
"Ironically" HMRC's prime targets are not large businesses but the low hanging fruit of individuals and SME's. The compliance yield from the Counter Avoidance Directorate rose significantly for individuals, whilst the amount collected from large businesses fell significantly from £943m in 2015/16 to £19m in 2016/17.
Dominic Arnold, head of tax investigations and disputes at Moore Stephens, is quoted by economia accusing HMRC of making full use of its powers to “shoot first and ask questions later”:
“Its ability to demand accelerated payments remains a draconian, but clearly increasingly effective mechanism for HMRC to clamp down on what it sees as abusive tax schemes.HMRC is more than happy with the arrangement, its spokesperson said:
That’s all well and good for the Treasury. However, it’s a heavy price for taxpayers to pay before they have even had a chance to put their case. Small businesses and individuals can be put under immense strain, financially and emotionally, while the process is ongoing.
Whether they have crossed a line or not, they don’t have long to find what can often amount to thousands of pounds in disputed tax.”
"HMRC has an excellent record in supporting those in genuine difficulty, including offering more time to pay if appropriate.
APNs change where the disputed tax sits while the issue is being investigated, ensuring that those who have used avoidance schemes are in the same position as everyone else who pays their tax, up front, and on time. The regime does not change taxpayer appeal rights."
Last year HMRC was forced to withdraw 4,300 APNs issued in error out of a total of 60,000.
Tax does have to be taxing.
Professional Cover Against the Threat of Costly TAX and VAT Investigations
Insurance to protect you against the cost of enquiry or dispute with HMRC is available from several sources including Solar Tax Investigation Insurance.
Ken Frost has negotiated a 10% discount on any polices that may suit your needs.
However, neither Ken Frost nor HMRCISSHITE either endorses or recommends their services.
What is Solar Tax Investigation Insurance?
Solar Tax Investigation Insurance 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 Solar Tax Investigation Insurance
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"
HMRC an organisation who have difficulty complying with basic laws. They also, apparently, reward the deceitful misconduct of certain managers. Furthermore, anyone who has the regular contact with HMRC will know they are not exactly renowned for competence and professionalism. The 7% error rate is a case in point. It therefore cannot be right, as a matter of fairness, that this mob of an organisation are given powers which have the potential to destroy the finances and lives of tax payers. APNs are against all legal and constitutional norms.
ReplyDelete'scuse me! Is there another one of those pachyderms sat nonchanantly in a corner here?
ReplyDeleteAttention directed obviously to a low hanging fruit area with associated diversion of resource?
Whilst attention is aimed at the lower hanging fruit the bigger juicier items higher up escape attention and resource application?
Well, the dichotomy here is if the resources weren't diverted to the lower hanging fruit and the results are simply better application/targetting/intelligence/connect connections, then WTF happened higher up, somone take their eye off the ball?
Whichever way you play HMRC's own figures, they sure as fuck don't ad up?
Discuss?
Mrs May?, Oh, on second thoughts she appears somewhat at a loss lately.