Football agent loses tax avoidance case

Jerome Anderson, a former football agent has finally lost his tax case of £1.2 million against HMRC. The Upper Tribunal concluded that Mr Anderson and eight other individuals failed in using this scheme which involved investing in recruiting young players in South Africa. Mr. Jerone Anderson was trying to use this investment to claim a bogus loss of £3 million in order to significantly reduce his tax liability. Read more..

Code of Practice 9 tax investigation closed

This client came to us from London after he was referred to our firm by his accountants. This Code of Practice 9 ( COP 9 ) tax investigation case was being dealt with by a forensic accountant in Wales who decided to close his business and do a runner after taking a large fee upfront. The case involved undisclosed income from various sources over 13 years and involved complex transactions. Our team of tax experts took on the case and after thoroughly investigating the facts and meeting with HMRC officers, were able to reach a settlement that was acceptable to our client and HMRC. The case was closed and our client thanked us for our efforts to bring his life back to normal. Our analysis: Code of practice 8 and code of practice 9 tax investigation cases are very complex. With Code of Practice 9 cases, there is immunity for making a full disclosure. If however, the tax payer does not make a full disclosure, there is a risk of prosecution by HMRC. There have been numerous cases of tax payer being sentenced to prison for not making a full disclosure during the Code of Practice 9 enquiry. Our team of tax specialists have extensive experience in dealing with Code of Practice 8 and Code of Practice 9 investigations and negotiating best possible settlements for the clients.

Man jailed after failing to comply with Code of Practice 9 investigation

Bartley Murphy from Demesne Road, Downpatrick, has been sentenced to prison for 2 years and three months for tax fraud. Mr. Murphy developed and sold several houses between 2007 and 2014 but did not declare his profits to HMRC or paid any tax. He was offered Contractual Disclosure Facility under Code of Practice 9 by HMRC to make a full disclosure of his tax irregularities. However, despite being under a serious tax investigation Mr. Murphy chose to lie and did not make a full disclosure. Read more.

Galiara [2018] TC 06431

The First Tier Tribunal has decided in favour of the appellant appeal against late filing penalties issued by HMRC. The Tribunal Judge found that HMRC had not been able to provide sufficient evidence that a notice to deliver a tax return had been sent to the tax payer. This case demonstrates that HMRC’s penalty system is not always right and that if appealed correctly, penalties issued wrongly can be cancelled.

VAT Investigation Closed

This was a VAT investigation by HMRC into a retail company. At the outset, the figures proposed by HMRC were significantly higher compared to the information provided by our clients in terms of their sales and profits. Our team of tax investigation specialist met with HMRC and explained the business and demonstrated how the sales estimates were incorrect. We provided the required information and after a long delay, HMRC accepted that there was no VAT or corporation tax due and the case was eventually closed. We are grateful to HMRC officers involved for their cooperation and keeping an open mind in relation to our client’s struggling business.

Our analysis: We have come across a number of situations, where only due to poor communication by the accountants/ tax advisers and tax payers, a simple tax investigation is made far complicated than it needs to be. We have seen some accountants and their clients panic when meeting with HMRC officers and mis-communicating important facts that could be seen positively by HMRC. In our experience, effective communication of the facts and background to HMRC officers is critical in any tax investigation.