Having just started my own practice, I have spent considerable time putting appropriate processes in place to ensure that the business is compliant with all of its obligations. The material on the CIOT’s website was invaluable in this respect. Outside of setting up the business, I have spent a great deal of time advising clients on the implications of HMRC’s disguised remuneration provisions, which are still causing significant difficulties.
If you could make one change to a tax, what would it be?
I would like to see a review of HMRC’s litigation and settlement strategy. I appreciate the need for HMRC to apply a consistent approach to settling disputes, but at a practical level the guidance often discourages HMRC officers from exploring avenues for settlement, which prolongs rather than expedites disputes.
What do you know now that you wish you’d known at the start of your career?
That no-one can have all the answers. The more I learn about tax, the more I appreciate the value of collaboration and seeking different views.
Are there any new rules that are causing a real problem?
The disguised remuneration provisions have been really difficult for advisers and taxpayers to manage. The changes in the past few Finance Acts have led to a set of provisions which are unnecessarily complex and have had a very significant, and often unexpected, financial impact on clients. Although robust anti-avoidance provisions were required, the rules could have been much more clearly targeted. They ought to have been implemented as a package, rather than subject to constant revision.
Please share a practical or technical tip in your area of expertise.
A simple point, but one that is frequently overlooked: always check the time limits. I often see invalid assessments and determinations which ought to have been challenged where the deadline had passed. Similarly, I’ve seen circumstances where it was assumed that claims could not be made which were actually in time.
Has a recent tax case caught your eye?
I think the fallout from the ‘staleness’ arguments in cases like Beagles and Tooth is likely to be far-reaching. HMRC seems to be issuing discovery assessments more frequently, and the various procedural challenges to their validity are likely to develop in interesting ways.
What do you think will be the next big focus for tax investigations?
I think there’s likely to be lots of activity around offshore errors and the implications of the requirement to correct penalty regime. Offshore taxation is obviously incredibly complex, and the financial consequences of making errors are now very significant. I anticipate that HMRC will be much more proactive in this space as it begins to utilise the extensive information now available to it. Taking all that together, I anticipate there will be much more focus on what is and isn’t a reasonable excuse for offshore errors.
What impact will the disguised remuneration loan charge review have for taxpayers who have not settled with HMRC?
It’s hard to see that the review will make a meaningful difference. It appears that the terms will be very limited in scope. However, even if there are significant changes to the loan charge, a thorough review of the other aspects of the provisions, such as the close companies gateway and the double taxation provisions, is the only way that the rules will be made to function in a logical and equitable way.
Finally, you might not know this about me but...
I like to keep fit, and I used to compete as a kickboxer, although I was always better at getting out of the way than the kicking or boxing bit!
Having just started my own practice, I have spent considerable time putting appropriate processes in place to ensure that the business is compliant with all of its obligations. The material on the CIOT’s website was invaluable in this respect. Outside of setting up the business, I have spent a great deal of time advising clients on the implications of HMRC’s disguised remuneration provisions, which are still causing significant difficulties.
If you could make one change to a tax, what would it be?
I would like to see a review of HMRC’s litigation and settlement strategy. I appreciate the need for HMRC to apply a consistent approach to settling disputes, but at a practical level the guidance often discourages HMRC officers from exploring avenues for settlement, which prolongs rather than expedites disputes.
What do you know now that you wish you’d known at the start of your career?
That no-one can have all the answers. The more I learn about tax, the more I appreciate the value of collaboration and seeking different views.
Are there any new rules that are causing a real problem?
The disguised remuneration provisions have been really difficult for advisers and taxpayers to manage. The changes in the past few Finance Acts have led to a set of provisions which are unnecessarily complex and have had a very significant, and often unexpected, financial impact on clients. Although robust anti-avoidance provisions were required, the rules could have been much more clearly targeted. They ought to have been implemented as a package, rather than subject to constant revision.
Please share a practical or technical tip in your area of expertise.
A simple point, but one that is frequently overlooked: always check the time limits. I often see invalid assessments and determinations which ought to have been challenged where the deadline had passed. Similarly, I’ve seen circumstances where it was assumed that claims could not be made which were actually in time.
Has a recent tax case caught your eye?
I think the fallout from the ‘staleness’ arguments in cases like Beagles and Tooth is likely to be far-reaching. HMRC seems to be issuing discovery assessments more frequently, and the various procedural challenges to their validity are likely to develop in interesting ways.
What do you think will be the next big focus for tax investigations?
I think there’s likely to be lots of activity around offshore errors and the implications of the requirement to correct penalty regime. Offshore taxation is obviously incredibly complex, and the financial consequences of making errors are now very significant. I anticipate that HMRC will be much more proactive in this space as it begins to utilise the extensive information now available to it. Taking all that together, I anticipate there will be much more focus on what is and isn’t a reasonable excuse for offshore errors.
What impact will the disguised remuneration loan charge review have for taxpayers who have not settled with HMRC?
It’s hard to see that the review will make a meaningful difference. It appears that the terms will be very limited in scope. However, even if there are significant changes to the loan charge, a thorough review of the other aspects of the provisions, such as the close companies gateway and the double taxation provisions, is the only way that the rules will be made to function in a logical and equitable way.
Finally, you might not know this about me but...
I like to keep fit, and I used to compete as a kickboxer, although I was always better at getting out of the way than the kicking or boxing bit!
.tmb-editorspic.jpg?sfvrsn=df04ab27_1)
