‘The letters refer to penalties for not filing your personal tax return on time. However, we were unable to (sic) this as we were not in possession of your personal tax reference number at the time. I will write to HMRC on your behalf to appeal against the penalties explaining the reasons why the returns were not filed. HMRC have sent another questionnaire out regarding your VAT application and I have completed it and posted it out for you to sign and send back to them. A reminder too if (sic) would kindly send me the company bank statements for the year ended31 August 2016 , so I can complete the company accounts.’
‘We act for the above and have 64-8 authority in place … Miss Chalmers was not in receipt of her UTR number and had requested it on numerous occasions as she moved address during that time, (sic) once she had obtained her UTR we obtained authority and have recently duly filed her 2014, 2015 and 2016 tax returns on line . Miss Chalmers was not deliberately failing to file her tax returns and had no tax liability for the years in question.’
‘Miss Chalmers paid her accountant to deal with all aspects of her taxes and relied on him entirely to do so. … On one occasion, Miss Chalmers e-mailed her previous accountant with a copy of a penalty notice received and thought this was in relation to VAT, this shows Miss Chalmers’ lack of knowledge … [Mr Moon said] he could not submit Miss Chalmers’ personal tax return on time as he did not have the UTR and advised he would be appealing the penalties. Miss Chalmers therefore assumed all was in hand….’
‘Special circumstances mean circumstances that are uncommon or exceptional’
‘(1) The responsibility for filing a return by the due date is yours. This cannot be transferred to (sic) third party. If you feel your previous agent failed in their professional capacity, you should seek redress from them. (2) The penalties for late filing of a self-assessment return are based solely because the return has been filed late, and are in no way linked to your tax position or income.’
‘ 7 Notice of liability to income tax and capital gains tax (1) Every person who – (a) is chargeable to income tax or capital gains tax for any year of assessment, and […] shall, subject to subsection (3) below, within the notification period, give notice to an officer of the Board that he is so chargeable.’
‘(1) For the purpose of establishing the amounts in which a person is chargeable to income tax and capital gains tax for a year of assessment, and the amount payable by him by way of income tax for that year, he may be required by a notice given to him by an officer of the Board— (a) to make and deliver to the officer, a return containing such information as may reasonably be required in pursuance of the notice, and (b) to deliver with the return such accounts, statements and documents, relating to information contained in the return, as may reasonably be so required.’
‘(1) Liability to a penalty under any paragraph of this Schedule does not arise in relation to a failure to make a return if [the taxpayer] satisfies HMRC or (on appeal) the First-tier Tribunal or Upper Tribunal that there is a reasonable excuse for the failure. (2) For the purposes of sub-paragraph (1) – (a) an insufficiency of funds is not a reasonable excuse, unless attributable to events outside [the taxpayer’s] control, (b) where [the taxpayer] relies on any other person to do anything, that is not a reasonable excuse unless [the taxpayer] took reasonable care to avoid the failure. (c) where [the taxpayer] had a reasonable excuse for the failure but the excuse has ceased, [the taxpayer] is to be treated as having continued to have the excuse if the failure is remedied without unreasonable delay after the excuse ceased.’
‘(1) affirm or cancel the penalty imposed by HMRC; and (2) to substitute for HMRC's decision another decision that HMRC had power to make.’
‘Where an Act authorises or requires any document to be served by post (whether the expression “serve” or the expression “give” or “send” or any other expression is used) then, unless the contrary intention appears, the service is deemed to be effected by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting a letter containing the document and, unless the contrary is proved, to have been effected at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post.’
‘The obligation to make the tax return on time is nonetheless the taxpayer’s. It remains his obligation regardless of the fact that he may have delegated the task of making the return to his agent. There may be circumstances in which the taxpayer’s failure, through his agent, to comply with, eg the obligation to make the return on time can amount to a “reasonable excuse”. To be such a circumstance it must be something outside the control of the taxpayer and his agent or something that could not reasonably have been foreseen. It must be something exceptional.’
‘The test of whether there is a reasonable excuse is an objective one. In my judgment it is an objective test in this sense. One must ask oneself: was what the taxpayer did a reasonable thing for a responsible trader conscious of and intending to comply with his obligations regarding tax, but having the experience and other relevant attributes of the taxpayer and placed in the situation that the taxpayer found himself at the relevant time, a reasonable thing to do?’
‘The test of reasonable excuse involves the application of an impersonal, and objective, legal standard to a particular set of facts and circumstances. The test is to determine what a reasonable taxpayer in the position of the taxpayer would have done in those circumstances, and by reference to that test to determine whether the conduct of the taxpayer can be regarded as conforming to that standard.’
‘160. I do not agree that Mr Barrett’s actions were unreasonable. In my view, the steps taken by Mr Barrett to employ an accountant who evidently held himself out as able to provide a comprehensive service, both as regards accounting and tax, for a small business such as that of Mr Aspros, and in providing all relevant documentation to Mr Aspros, were the actions of a reasonable taxpayer in the position of Mr Barrett. Whilst Mr Barrett did not undertake any research in to Mr Aspros’ capabilities before appointing him, he was reasonably entitled to assume, from Mr Aspros’ acceptance of the appointment, that Mr Aspros would be competent to deal with both the accounting and tax aspects of his business. I do not accept that such a reasonable taxpayer would necessarily have taken separate steps to inform himself, independently of his accountant, of his obligations to make returns under the CIS, whether by seeking a second opinion, or by consulting HMRC, or HMRC’s published guidance, himself. 161. The test is one of reasonableness. No higher (or lower) standard should be applied. The mere fact that something that could have been done has not been done does not of itself necessarily mean that an individual’s conduct in failing to act in a particular way is to be regarded as unreasonable. It is a question of degree having regard to all the circumstances, including the particular circumstances of the individual taxpayer. There can be no universal rule; what might be considered an unreasonable failure on the part of one taxpayer in one set of 40 circumstances might be regarded as not unreasonable in the case of another whose circumstances are different.’
‘In deciding whether the excuse put forward is, viewed objectively, sufficient to amount to a reasonable excuse, the tribunal should bear in mind all relevant circumstances; because the issue is whether the particular taxpayer has a reasonable excuse, the experience, knowledge and other attributes of the particular taxpayer should be taken into account, as well as the situation in which that taxpayer was at the relevant time or times …’
‘… It is much-cited aphorism that “ignorance of the law is no excuse”, and on occasion this has been given as a reason why the defence of reasonable excuse cannot be available in such circumstances. We see not basis for this argument. Some requirements of the law are well-known, simple and straightforward but others are much less so. It will be a matter of judgment for the FTT in each case whether it was objectively reasonable for the particular taxpayer, in the circumstances of the case, to have been ignorant of the requirement in question, and for how long. The Clean Car Co itself provides an example of such a situation.’
‘The adjective “special” requires simply that the circumstances be peculiar or distinctive. But that does not necessarily mean that the circumstances which affect all or most taxpayers could not be special: an ultra vires assertion by HMRC that for a period penalties would be halved might well be special circumstances will be those confined to particular taxpayers or possibly classes of taxpayers. They must encompass the situation in which it would be significantly unfair to the taxpayer to bear the whole penalty.’
‘… once [Miss Chalmers] obtained her UTR we obtained authority and have recently duly filed her 2014, 2015 and 2016 tax returns on line.’
‘15/05/2017 … Agent appeals against 13/14 & 14/15 LFPs. No action taken re appeals as returns not yet filed (despite agent claims). AP PO 2s to TP with copies to agent.’