Gareth Evans v The Commissioners for HMRC
[2023] UKFTT 869 (TC)
Mary Simpkins v The Commissioners for HMRC
16 October 2024
[2024] UKFTT 924 (TC)
First-tier Tribunal
The tax office suspected someone wasn't paying enough tax and asked for information. The person didn't show up to court to challenge this. The judge said the tax office's request was fair, and the person must give them the information.
Key Facts
- •Mary Simpkins appealed an information notice (Notice) issued under paragraph 1 of Schedule 36 Finance Act 2008 (Sch 36) by HMRC.
- •HMRC suspected tax avoidance related to Simpkins' employment with Olympus Consulting Ltd (OCL).
- •The Notice requested information about Simpkins' employment terms, payments received, clients, intermediaries, bank statements, contracts, payslips, and correspondence.
- •Simpkins did not attend the hearing, and her postponement requests were denied.
- •The Tribunal considered whether the Notice was validly issued.
Legal Principles
An information notice under Sch 36 is valid if the information is "reasonably required by the officer for the purposes of checking the taxpayer’s tax position."
Schedule 36 Finance Act 2008
The burden of proof initially rests with HMRC to demonstrate that the information is reasonably required to check the taxpayer's tax position.
Surat Singh Sangha v HMRC [2024] UKFTT 00564 (TC)
A Sch 36 notice can be appealed only to determine the validity of the notice.
Paragraph 29, Schedule 36 Finance Act 2008
"Checking" includes any investigation or enquiry. A formal enquiry under section 9A Taxes Management Act 1970 is not required.
Schedule 36 Finance Act 2008
The Tribunal may proceed with a hearing if a party fails to attend, provided they were notified and it's in the interests of justice.
Rule 33 Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Tax Chamber) Rules 2009
Outcomes
The appeal was dismissed.
The Tribunal found the Notice validly issued as the requested information was reasonably required to check Simpkins’ tax position, even without an open enquiry and concerning a partially current tax year.
Simpkins was ordered to comply with the Notice within 57 days of the judgment.
The Tribunal considered the time allowed (one month) reasonable given the information requested and the period of employment involved.