News – 18.11.24
International Men's Day - breaking the silence around men's mental health
International Men's Day - breaking the silence around men's mental health … Read more
Insight – 20.11.24
A change in US Presidency: How might it affect your finances?
In this article, we explore the potential economic and financial impacts of Donald Trump's return to power. … Read more
Upcoming event – 10.12.24
Funding innovation in the technology sector: Are the government doing enough?
Join us for an exclusive roundtable breakfast to explore the question of whether the government are doing enough to support innovation in the technology sector. … Read more
Find us quickly
130 Wood Street, London, EC2V 6DL
enquiries@buzzacott.co.uk T +44 (0)20 7556 1200
Buzzacott’s Tax Investigations & Dispute Resolutions team were approached by an unrepresented taxpayer (Mr A) who was subject of an HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) Self-Assessment Compliance Check. He believed that what he had first thought was a straightforward check to confirm the accuracy of his tax return was now escalating out of control. Moreover, he had begun to feel uncomfortable dealing with HMRC.
The initial letter received by Mr A from HMRC seemed innocent enough. It invited him on receipt of the letter to telephone the HMRC officer to discuss how best they “work together to expedite the conclusion of the check”. Wishing to co-operate with the enquiry process, a call was duly made and what initially Mr A thought would be a 5-minute phone call turned out to be a 45-minute interview. Towards the end of the call, the HMRC officer had encouraged Mr A to let HMRC attend his home address to inspect business records and private financial records such as personal bank accounts. The venue of the inspection seemed strange to Mr A, given he ran his small medical profession from business premises elsewhere at which were located the statutory business records. Mr A was also asked to make available records that clearly would contain patient medical details.
Following Buzzacott’s engagement, our team contacted HMRC to discuss Mr A’s case. It became apparent that HMRC had formed the view that Mr A had achieved levels of savings over the year that was considered high when compared to the business profitability and what the ‘average model family’ spent on day-to-day living. Therefore, HMRC held the suspicion that there was suppressed takings and given this, HMRC were keen to attend Mr A’s home to witness for themselves the lifestyle Mr A and his family led.
The following outcome was achieved as a consequence of our appointment by Mr A:
By working with HMRC we were quickly able to satisfy the concerns they initially held which led to the enquiry being opened and fast-tracked the conclusion of the Compliance Check. Mr A felt relieved in being able to continue his business knowing that we were acting on his behalf and was grateful for our involvement.
This case highlights how HMRC’s pre-selection risks are not always correct and how HMRC may decide a course of action that best serves HMRC rather than the taxpayer, or one that is genuinely ‘reasonably required’ or could be undertaken by another method or course of action. This case also demonstrates how HMRC behave differently when a taxpayer is represented.
If you are the subject of an HMRC Compliance Check do not hesitate to contact us. Our team provide a discreet and comprehensive service that is tailored to meet your unique needs and protect your interests.
Buzzacott’s Tax Investigations & Dispute Resolutions team were approached by an unrepresented taxpayer (Mr A) who was subject of an HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) Self-Assessment Compliance Check. He believed that what he had first thought was a straightforward check to confirm the accuracy of his tax return was now escalating out of control. Moreover, he had begun to feel uncomfortable dealing with HMRC.
The initial letter received by Mr A from HMRC seemed innocent enough. It invited him on receipt of the letter to telephone the HMRC officer to discuss how best they “work together to expedite the conclusion of the check”. Wishing to co-operate with the enquiry process, a call was duly made and what initially Mr A thought would be a 5-minute phone call turned out to be a 45-minute interview. Towards the end of the call, the HMRC officer had encouraged Mr A to let HMRC attend his home address to inspect business records and private financial records such as personal bank accounts. The venue of the inspection seemed strange to Mr A, given he ran his small medical profession from business premises elsewhere at which were located the statutory business records. Mr A was also asked to make available records that clearly would contain patient medical details.
Following Buzzacott’s engagement, our team contacted HMRC to discuss Mr A’s case. It became apparent that HMRC had formed the view that Mr A had achieved levels of savings over the year that was considered high when compared to the business profitability and what the ‘average model family’ spent on day-to-day living. Therefore, HMRC held the suspicion that there was suppressed takings and given this, HMRC were keen to attend Mr A’s home to witness for themselves the lifestyle Mr A and his family led.
The following outcome was achieved as a consequence of our appointment by Mr A:
By working with HMRC we were quickly able to satisfy the concerns they initially held which led to the enquiry being opened and fast-tracked the conclusion of the Compliance Check. Mr A felt relieved in being able to continue his business knowing that we were acting on his behalf and was grateful for our involvement.
This case highlights how HMRC’s pre-selection risks are not always correct and how HMRC may decide a course of action that best serves HMRC rather than the taxpayer, or one that is genuinely ‘reasonably required’ or could be undertaken by another method or course of action. This case also demonstrates how HMRC behave differently when a taxpayer is represented.
If you are the subject of an HMRC Compliance Check do not hesitate to contact us. Our team provide a discreet and comprehensive service that is tailored to meet your unique needs and protect your interests.
Call us today on +44 (0)20 7710 3389 or fill in the form below and a member of our team will be in touch. All communications are in the strictest confidence.
We use necessary cookies to make our site work. We’d also like to set optional analytics and marketing cookies. We won't set these cookies unless you choose to turn these cookies on. Using this tool will also set a cookie on your device to remember your preferences.
For more information about the cookies we use, see our Cookies page.
Please be aware:
— If you delete all your cookies you will have to update your preferences with us again.
— If you use a different device or browser you will have to tell us your preferences again.
Necessary cookies help make a website usable by enabling basic functions like page navigation and access to secure areas of the website. The website cannot function properly without these cookies.
Analytics cookies help us to understand how visitors interact with our website by collecting and reporting information anonymously.
Marketing cookies are used to track visitors across websites. The intention is to display ads that are relevant and engaging for the individual user and thereby more valuable for publishers and third party advertisers.