<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>EICG Tax Advice &#187; employer compliance review</title>
	<atom:link href="http://eicg.co.uk/tag/employer-compliance-review/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://eicg.co.uk</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Jan 2012 12:23:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
		<item>
		<title>HMRC Tax Investigations boosted by Tax Discovery case</title>
		<link>http://eicg.co.uk/hmrc-what-are-they-up-to/hmrc-tax-investigations-boosted-by-tax-discovery-case</link>
		<comments>http://eicg.co.uk/hmrc-what-are-they-up-to/hmrc-tax-investigations-boosted-by-tax-discovery-case#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Jan 2012 12:23:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brenda</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[EICG]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Employment Tax Experts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC - what are they up to?]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tax Advice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tax Investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employer compliance review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employer compliance reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC tax compliance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC tax compliance visits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC tax investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAYE/NIC investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax enquiries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax enquiry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax investigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax investigations]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://eicg.co.uk/?p=279</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[HMRC Tax Investigations officials are entitled to investigate a tax return after the usual one-year limit has passed if their discovery assessment letter meets one of two tests, according to a recent Court of Appeal ruling that reaffirms a long-established power for the taxman. Derek Hankinson v HM Revenue &#038; Customs focused on whether HMRC [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px;">
			<a href="http://api.tweetmeme.com/share?url=http%3A%2F%2Feicg.co.uk%2Fhmrc-what-are-they-up-to%2Fhmrc-tax-investigations-boosted-by-tax-discovery-case"><br />
				<img src="http://api.tweetmeme.com/imagebutton.gif?url=http%3A%2F%2Feicg.co.uk%2Fhmrc-what-are-they-up-to%2Fhmrc-tax-investigations-boosted-by-tax-discovery-case&amp;style=normal&amp;b=2" height="61" width="50" /><br />
			</a>
		</div>
<p><a href="http://www.eicg.co.uk">HMRC Tax Investigations</a> officials are entitled to investigate a tax return after the usual one-year limit has passed if their discovery assessment letter meets one of two tests, according to a recent Court of Appeal ruling that reaffirms a long-established power for the taxman.</p>
<p>Derek Hankinson v HM Revenue &#038; Customs focused on whether HMRC used a section section 29 of the Taxes Management Act 1970 correctly when it investigated the taxpayer’s Self Assessment return for the 1998-99 tax year – six years after it was filed.</p>
<p>In 2005 HMRC assessed Hankinson’s tax return for 1998-99 and concluded he owed £30m in income tax and capital gains tax for the year because he was still a resident in the UK for tax purposes, despite having moved to the Netherlands.</p>
<p>Hankinson lost appeals against HMRC’s assessment of his tax liabilities in the first-tier and upper-tier tribunals.</p>
<p>In the Court of Appeal Hankinson challenged HMRC’s use of section 29 that was used to investigate his tax return for 1998-99.</p>
<p>HMRC usually has one year after a Self Assessment tax return is delivered to challenge and investigate it.</p>
<p>Under section 29 of the Taxes Management Act 1970 (at the time of the case), however, HMRC can investigate tax returns after the one-year window by sending a discovery assessment letter if one of two conditions apply. Firstly, the full and accurate facts were not available to HMRC officers due to incomplete disclosure, negligence or fraudulent behaviour by the taxpayer or agents; secondly the HMRC officer completing an enquiry could not have reasonably been expected to have been aware of the loss of tax.</p>
<p>In a judgment published in December last year Lord Justice Lewison concluded that HMRC’s use of section 29 was valid.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://eicg.co.uk/hmrc-what-are-they-up-to/hmrc-tax-investigations-boosted-by-tax-discovery-case/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Real Time Information</title>
		<link>http://eicg.co.uk/hmrc-what-are-they-up-to/real-time-information</link>
		<comments>http://eicg.co.uk/hmrc-what-are-they-up-to/real-time-information#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2011 13:34:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brenda</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[EICG]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Employment Tax Experts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC - what are they up to?]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAYE/NIC/CIS Penalties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Real Time Information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[business records check]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[compliance audits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employer compliance review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employer compliance reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[end of year records]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC penalties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC tax compliance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC tax compliance visits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAYE Underpayments]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAYE/NIC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAYE/NIC investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAYE/NIC PENALTIES]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RTI]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://eicg.co.uk/?p=277</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[HMRC is to change its Pay As You Earn (PAYE) system to detect owed deductions on a monthly basis, rather than yearly, in a bid to make the system easier for employers. Using Real Time Information (RTI), tax and deductions will be transmitted to HMRC each time an employee is paid, meaning employers will no [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px;">
			<a href="http://api.tweetmeme.com/share?url=http%3A%2F%2Feicg.co.uk%2Fhmrc-what-are-they-up-to%2Freal-time-information"><br />
				<img src="http://api.tweetmeme.com/imagebutton.gif?url=http%3A%2F%2Feicg.co.uk%2Fhmrc-what-are-they-up-to%2Freal-time-information&amp;style=normal&amp;b=2" height="61" width="50" /><br />
			</a>
		</div>
<p>HMRC is to change its <a href="http://www.eicg.co.uk">Pay As You Earn (PAYE) system</a> to detect owed deductions on a monthly basis, rather than yearly, in a bid to make the system easier for employers.</p>
<p>Using Real Time Information (RTI), tax and deductions will be transmitted to HMRC each time an employee is paid, meaning employers will no long be required to provide information using forms P35 and P14 after the year end or to send p45/46 when employees start or leave employment.</p>
<p>The phased introduction of RTI will begin in April 2012 with an initial pilot. HMRC hope to increase the number of employers joining RTI during 2012-13 following the scheme&#8217;s success. </p>
<p>However some advisors and employers are being a tad nieve about the introduction of this, believing all they read. Please do not fall into this trap, the number of professional bodies that are urging HMRC to delay its introduction is huge but HMRC are beligerantly pushing ahead, which spells a recipe for disaster. Still not convinced, well don&#8217;t forget there are now in year business record checks and potential for in year penalties, to encourage you. If you need advice on this and more importantly a review of what you are doing to make sure you can handle this, call us today on 0800 917 9176</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://eicg.co.uk/hmrc-what-are-they-up-to/real-time-information/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Business Record Checks</title>
		<link>http://eicg.co.uk/hmrc-what-are-they-up-to/business-record-checks</link>
		<comments>http://eicg.co.uk/hmrc-what-are-they-up-to/business-record-checks#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Oct 2011 14:05:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brenda</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Employment Tax Experts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC - what are they up to?]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC penalties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BRC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[business records check]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[compliance audits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employer compliance review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employer compliance reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employment tax]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC tax compliance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC tax compliance visits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAYE/NIC PENALTIES]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://eicg.co.uk/?p=262</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[During a business records check (BRC) an HMRC officer will view the business records of the current accounting period and assess whether those records are &#8216;adequate&#8217;. In this context &#8216;adequate&#8217; should mean the records are sufficient to compile accurate tax and VAT returns, but the BRC brief implies the HMRC officer will be looking for [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px;">
			<a href="http://api.tweetmeme.com/share?url=http%3A%2F%2Feicg.co.uk%2Fhmrc-what-are-they-up-to%2Fbusiness-record-checks"><br />
				<img src="http://api.tweetmeme.com/imagebutton.gif?url=http%3A%2F%2Feicg.co.uk%2Fhmrc-what-are-they-up-to%2Fbusiness-record-checks&amp;style=normal&amp;b=2" height="61" width="50" /><br />
			</a>
		</div>
<p></a>During a business records check (BRC) an HMRC officer will view the <a href="http://www.eicg.co.uk">business records</a> of the current accounting period and assess whether those records are &#8216;adequate&#8217;. In this context &#8216;adequate&#8217; should mean the records are sufficient to compile accurate tax and VAT returns, but the BRC brief implies the HMRC officer will be looking for the following errors in the business records:</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<ul>
<li>Understated sales;</li>
<li>Overstated expenses; and</li>
<li>Private expenditure claimed as business costs.</li>
</ul>
<p>If the HMRC officer concludes the business has failed to keep adequate records he can impose a penalty of up to £3,000.</p>
<p>HMRC tested their BRC programme between 4 April and 15 July 2011, during which up to 800 businesses were advised about their records, but no penalties were levied. However, since mid September HMRC has expanded the BRC programme and is increasing the number of HMRC officers involved from 30 to 120. HMRC plan to conduct approximately 12,000 BRC visits before 1 April 2012, and a further 20,000 BRC visits in 2012/13. On those numbers at least one of your clients is likely to be subject to a BRC in the next 18 months.</p>
<p>Business who were visited in the first stage of the BRC programme, and who were judged to have issues with their record keeping, are receiving follow-up letters from HMRC requesting a repeat visit; &#8216;to check that the appropriate improvements have been made.&#8217; Remember the records under inspection are those raw documents that have not yet been sorted or vetted by someone who understands exactly which expenses can be claimed for tax purpose</p>
<p>In this second stage of the BRC programme HMRC is prepared to impose penalties for serious record keeping failures. However, certain professional bodies, including myself are not convinced of the legal basis for charging such penalties, before the tax return has been submitted.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://eicg.co.uk/hmrc-what-are-they-up-to/business-record-checks/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Supreme Court overturns self-employed status at Autoclenz</title>
		<link>http://eicg.co.uk/cis/supreme-court-overturns-self-employed-status-at-autoclenz</link>
		<comments>http://eicg.co.uk/cis/supreme-court-overturns-self-employed-status-at-autoclenz#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Aug 2011 10:52:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brenda</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[CIS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Construction Industry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Employment Status]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Employment Tax Experts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC - what are they up to?]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CIS penalties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CIS review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employer compliance review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employment status]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employment status reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[false self employment in the construction industry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC tax compliance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[self employed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[self employment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[subcontractor status]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://eicg.co.uk/?p=256</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The recent Supreme Court judgment in Autoclenz Ltd v Belcher and Others (UKSC 41) backed a group of self-employed car valets who worked for Autoclenz and argued that clauses in their contracts did not reflect their actual working arrangements. In spite of clauses on mutuality and substitution, the court ruled that they were obliged to provide the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px;">
			<a href="http://api.tweetmeme.com/share?url=http%3A%2F%2Feicg.co.uk%2Fcis%2Fsupreme-court-overturns-self-employed-status-at-autoclenz"><br />
				<img src="http://api.tweetmeme.com/imagebutton.gif?url=http%3A%2F%2Feicg.co.uk%2Fcis%2Fsupreme-court-overturns-self-employed-status-at-autoclenz&amp;style=normal&amp;b=2" height="61" width="50" /><br />
			</a>
		</div>
<p>The recent Supreme Court judgment in <strong><a href="http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKSC/2011/41.html" target="_blank">Autoclenz Ltd v Belcher and Others</a></strong> (UKSC 41) backed a group of <a href="http://www.eicg.co.uk/employment-status">self-employed</a> car valets who worked for Autoclenz and argued that clauses in their contracts did not reflect their actual working arrangements. In spite of clauses on mutuality and substitution, the court ruled that they were obliged to provide the services personally. The legal dispute started in 2007.</p>
<p>The Supreme Court decision establishes a precedent that the conduct of the contractual parties could override the written terms.</p>
<p>In its ruling the Court said decided that the contracts did not reflect the true agreement between the parties and that in reality “four essential contractual terms were agreed: (1) that the valeters would perform the services defined in the contract for Autoclenz within a reasonable time and in a good and workmanlike manner; (2) that the valeters would be paid for that work; (3) that the valeters were obliged to carry out the work offered to them and Autoclenz undertook to offer work; and (4) that the valeters must personally do the work and could not provide a substitute to do so.”</p>
<p>This case highlights the importance for all parties to ensure that they have seen the contract of services and agree that it reflects the true working practices of everyone involved. The court stated that only one party needed to claim that a clause in the contract did not reflect their intentions in order for the clause to be considered a sham.</p>
<p>If you have any self employed people contact us today to ensure that your current arrangements reflect this new opinion, on 0800 917 9176</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://eicg.co.uk/cis/supreme-court-overturns-self-employed-status-at-autoclenz/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>HMRC increase Post Scanning</title>
		<link>http://eicg.co.uk/cis/hmrc-increase-post-scanning</link>
		<comments>http://eicg.co.uk/cis/hmrc-increase-post-scanning#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Jun 2011 13:16:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brenda</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[CIS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Construction Industry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Employment Tax Experts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC - what are they up to?]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC penalties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CIS late filing penalties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CIS penalties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employer compliance checks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employer compliance review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employer compliance reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC Post Scanning]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC tax compliance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC tax compliance visits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC tax investigations]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://eicg.co.uk/?p=252</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Documents relating to tax enquiries and employer compliance checks on employers will now be scanned electronically by HMRC staff in an attempt to improve its service. A single PO Box address and case reference will be used to identify the mail that is scanned. HMRC said it plans to scan documents from a “large majority” [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px;">
			<a href="http://api.tweetmeme.com/share?url=http%3A%2F%2Feicg.co.uk%2Fcis%2Fhmrc-increase-post-scanning"><br />
				<img src="http://api.tweetmeme.com/imagebutton.gif?url=http%3A%2F%2Feicg.co.uk%2Fcis%2Fhmrc-increase-post-scanning&amp;style=normal&amp;b=2" height="61" width="50" /><br />
			</a>
		</div>
<div>Documents relating to tax enquiries and <a href="http://www.eicg.co.uk">employer compliance checks</a> on  employers will now be scanned electronically by HMRC staff in an attempt  to improve its service.</div>
<div><a href="http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/news/changes-incoming-mail-golive.htm"><strong> </strong></a></div>
<div>A single PO Box address and case reference will be used to identify  the mail that is scanned. HMRC said it plans to scan documents from a  “large majority” of its compliance checks during 2011-12.</div>
<div></div>
<div>“Scanning the incoming mail will mean that the documents and  letters received will be linked to the customer case record and  available to caseworkers within 36 hours, it will also help to reduce  the risk of post going astray,” HMRC said.</div>
<div></div>
<div>Tax advisers have long complained about the time it takes HMRC to  respond to postal enquiries and confirm receipt of documents. <a href="http://www.accountingweb.co.uk/group/hmrc-working-together-e-group/summary-thread-postal-contact"><strong> </strong></a> HMRC’s stance on postal tax return submissions suffered a blow in  February, when a first tier tax tribunal upheld a taxpayer’s appeal  against an HMRC penalty for a late tax return.</div>
<div></div>
<div>The <a href="http://www.financeandtaxtribunals.gov.uk/Aspx/view.aspx?id=5347" target="_blank"><strong>Heronslea v HMRC</strong></a> appeal  (TC00978) was over a Construction Industry Scheme (CIS) tax return due  on 19 June 2010 that HMRC claimed did not arrive until 22 June.  Heronslea director Michael Clifton appealed the £100 penalty and told  HMRC he had posted the return (along with other documents) in good time  because he was going away on holiday.</div>
<div>
<div>Tribunal judge Anne Redston noted previous episodes where the  taxpayer struggled to get the department to send forms to his correct  address. She also noted the absence of any mail logging at the HMRC  office.</div>
</div>
<div></div>
<div></div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://eicg.co.uk/cis/hmrc-increase-post-scanning/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>HMRC Tax Amnesties</title>
		<link>http://eicg.co.uk/hmrc-what-are-they-up-to/hmrc-tax-amnesties</link>
		<comments>http://eicg.co.uk/hmrc-what-are-they-up-to/hmrc-tax-amnesties#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Jun 2011 12:04:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brenda</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[EICG]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Employment Tax Experts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC - what are they up to?]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAYE/NIC/CIS Penalties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tax Investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business Mileage Allowance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business Mileage Records]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[business records check]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employer compliance review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employer compliance reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC tax amnesty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC tax compliance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC tax investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAYE/NIC investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tax amnesty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax enquiries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax enquiry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tax Health Plan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax investigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[THP]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://eicg.co.uk/?p=249</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In December 2009,  HM Revenue &#38; Customs (HMRC) stated that they had identified 800 Hospital Consultants it wished to launch a tax investigation into  and of its intention to initiate an amnesty. The Tax Health Plan (THP) was subsequently launched. The THP raised over £10 million through over 1500 disclosures, with an individual payment of [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px;">
			<a href="http://api.tweetmeme.com/share?url=http%3A%2F%2Feicg.co.uk%2Fhmrc-what-are-they-up-to%2Fhmrc-tax-amnesties"><br />
				<img src="http://api.tweetmeme.com/imagebutton.gif?url=http%3A%2F%2Feicg.co.uk%2Fhmrc-what-are-they-up-to%2Fhmrc-tax-amnesties&amp;style=normal&amp;b=2" height="61" width="50" /><br />
			</a>
		</div>
<p>In December 2009,  HM Revenue &amp; Customs (HMRC) stated that they had identified 800 Hospital Consultants it wished to launch a <a href="http://www.eicg.co.uk">tax investigation</a> into  and of its intention to initiate an amnesty. The Tax Health Plan (THP) was subsequently launched.</p>
<p>The THP raised over £10 million through over 1500 disclosures, with an individual payment of over £1 million by a doctor and over £300,000 by a dentist.</p>
<p>HMRC has now announced that it has begun 500 enquiries and 6 criminal investigations since the THP closed.</p>
<p>The dispute between HMRC and Hospital Consultants concerning what constitutes their business base for mileage purposes continues to run. A Tribunal case is due to be heard this summer, although it is understood that it involves a geriatrician, rather than the more representative Hospital Consultant undertaking a combination of NHS and private practice work at regular locations. So watch this space because it isn&#8217;t only these high profile cases that employers need to be aware of there is also the real danger that employees and Directors are claiming travel &amp; subsistence costs incorrectly as they have not identified a persons permanent/temporary workplace. We are here to help you with this exercise so call us today on <span class="skype_pnh_print_container">0800 9179176</span><span class="skype_pnh_container" dir="ltr"><span class="skype_pnh_mark"> begin_of_the_skype_highlighting</span> <span class="skype_pnh_highlighting_inactive_common" title="Call this phone number in United Kingdom with Skype: +448009179176" dir="ltr"><span class="skype_pnh_left_span"> </span><span class="skype_pnh_dropart_span" title="Skype actions"><span class="skype_pnh_dropart_flag_span" style="background-position: -2001px 1px ! important;"> </span> </span><span class="skype_pnh_textarea_span"><span class="skype_pnh_text_span">0800 9179176</span></span><span class="skype_pnh_right_span"> </span></span> <span class="skype_pnh_mark">end_of_the_skype_highlighting</span></span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://eicg.co.uk/hmrc-what-are-they-up-to/hmrc-tax-amnesties/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Tax Investigations &#8211; HMRC turns up the heat on plumbing industry</title>
		<link>http://eicg.co.uk/cis/tax-investigations-hmrc-turns-up-the-heat-on-plumbing-industry</link>
		<comments>http://eicg.co.uk/cis/tax-investigations-hmrc-turns-up-the-heat-on-plumbing-industry#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 May 2011 10:36:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brenda</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[CIS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Construction Industry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC - what are they up to?]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tax Investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CIS late filing penalties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CIS penalties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CIS review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[compliance audits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Construction Industry reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employer compliance review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employer compliance reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employment status reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gas fitters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[heating engineers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC tax investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAYE/NIC investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[plumbers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[subcontractor status]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://eicg.co.uk/?p=238</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[About 50,000 plumbers, gas fitters and heating engineers will start receiving letters this month from HM Revenue &#38; Customs (HMRC) alerting them to the chance to take advantage of a special time-limited tax plan to put right any gaps that might exist in their tax affairs or face a tax investigation. The letter will explain [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px;">
			<a href="http://api.tweetmeme.com/share?url=http%3A%2F%2Feicg.co.uk%2Fcis%2Ftax-investigations-hmrc-turns-up-the-heat-on-plumbing-industry"><br />
				<img src="http://api.tweetmeme.com/imagebutton.gif?url=http%3A%2F%2Feicg.co.uk%2Fcis%2Ftax-investigations-hmrc-turns-up-the-heat-on-plumbing-industry&amp;style=normal&amp;b=2" height="61" width="50" /><br />
			</a>
		</div>
<div>
<p>About 50,000 plumbers, gas fitters and heating engineers will  start receiving letters this month from HM Revenue &amp; Customs (HMRC)  alerting them to the chance to take advantage of a special time-limited  tax plan to put right any gaps that might exist in their tax affairs or face a <a href="http://www.eicg.co.uk">tax investigation</a>.</p>
</div>
<p>The letter will explain that, once the opportunity expires, the  tax authorities will begin a clampdown on those working in the sector  who have failed to declare earnings and pay the tax they owe.</p>
<p>Under  the tax plan, plumbers, gas fitters, heating engineers and members of  associated trades who owe tax which they have not yet declared can come  forward anytime up to 31 May to tell HMRC they want to take part. If  they make a full disclosure, most face a low penalty rate of 10 per  cent, with a maximum of 20 per cent. Once they come forward, they have  until 31 August to make their disclosure and arrange for payment.</p>
<p>After  that date, using information pulled together from different sources,  HMRC will investigate those who have failed to come forward. Substantial  penalties or even criminal prosecution could follow.</p>
<p>The  Plumbers’ Tax Safe Plan (PTSP) is the first initiative in a campaign  focused on tradespeople. It is designed to make it easy for those in the  plumbing industry to put their tax affairs in order.</p>
<p>Mike Wells, HMRC&#8217;s Director of Risk and Intelligence, said:</p>
<p>“Our aim is to make it easy for plumbers to contact us, make a full disclosure of income and face a reduced penalty.</p>
<p>“We  are using a variety of intelligence sources to target plumbers who have  not declared their full income and I urge tradespeople in this group  who think they owe tax on their income to get in touch with HMRC and get  their tax affairs in order simply and on the best available terms.</p>
<p>“The first step for those wishing to avoid a full tax investigation with much higher penalties is to notify us.</p>
<p>“We  do not think everyone who receives a letter owes us tax. However, if  you owe tax and don&#8217;t get a letter, do not assume that HMRC will not  catch up with you.”</p>
<p>To join the tax plan people in the plumbing industry must:</p>
<p>* Register with HMRC to “notify” that they plan to make a voluntary tax disclosure by 31 May<br />
*  They then have until the 31 August to tell HMRC about tax due and make  arrangements to pay any tax interest and penalties due. This is called  “making a disclosure”.</p>
<p>Please be aware that before you launch forth with this &#8220;offer&#8221; from HMRC you should consult a specialist telephone <span class="skype_pnh_print_container">0800917 9176</span><span class="skype_pnh_container" dir="ltr"><span class="skype_pnh_mark"> begin_of_the_skype_highlighting</span> <span class="skype_pnh_highlighting_inactive_common" title="Call this phone number in United Kingdom with Skype: +448009179176" dir="ltr"><span class="skype_pnh_left_span"> </span><span class="skype_pnh_dropart_span" title="Skype actions"><span class="skype_pnh_dropart_flag_span" style="background-position: -2001px 1px ! important;"> </span> </span><span class="skype_pnh_textarea_span"><span class="skype_pnh_text_span">0800917 9176</span></span><span class="skype_pnh_right_span"> </span></span> <span class="skype_pnh_mark">end_of_the_skype_highlighting</span></span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://eicg.co.uk/cis/tax-investigations-hmrc-turns-up-the-heat-on-plumbing-industry/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>HMRC inspections to rise in order to collect more tax</title>
		<link>http://eicg.co.uk/cis/hmrc-inspections-to-rise-in-order-to-collect-more-tax</link>
		<comments>http://eicg.co.uk/cis/hmrc-inspections-to-rise-in-order-to-collect-more-tax#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Sep 2010 08:18:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brenda</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[CIS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC - what are they up to?]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC penalties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAYE/NIC/CIS Penalties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tax Investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CIS late filing penalties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CIS penalties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[compliance audits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Construction Industry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Construction Industry reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employer compliance review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employer compliance reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employment status reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC inspections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC tax compliance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC tax investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAYE investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAYE/NIC healthchecks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAYE/NIC investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAYE/NIC PENALTIES]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax enquiries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax investigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax investigations]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eicg.co.uk/?p=137</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A £158BN hole in the public finances means that HMRC are being used to try and raise extra cash for the Treasury, as quickly as possible and that will mean easy targets, so small and medium size firms, anyone in the construction industry are in the direct firing line for: employer compliance reviews PAYE/NIC investigations [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px;">
			<a href="http://api.tweetmeme.com/share?url=http%3A%2F%2Feicg.co.uk%2Fcis%2Fhmrc-inspections-to-rise-in-order-to-collect-more-tax"><br />
				<img src="http://api.tweetmeme.com/imagebutton.gif?url=http%3A%2F%2Feicg.co.uk%2Fcis%2Fhmrc-inspections-to-rise-in-order-to-collect-more-tax&amp;style=normal&amp;b=2" height="61" width="50" /><br />
			</a>
		</div>
<p>A £158BN hole in the public finances means that HMRC are being used to try and raise extra cash for the Treasury, as quickly as possible and that will mean easy targets, so small and medium size firms, anyone in the construction industry are in the direct firing line for:</p>
<p>employer compliance reviews</p>
<p>PAYE/NIC investigations</p>
<p>Employment status reviews</p>
<p>tax investigations</p>
<p>you name it and they are heading your way and don&#8217;t think it won&#8217;t happen to you &#8211; it will, so why not take advantage of the special deal that EICG is running this month on PAYE/NIC healthchecks and Construction Industry reviews, call us today on 0800 917 9176 to see how we can help you avoid being a victim</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://eicg.co.uk/cis/hmrc-inspections-to-rise-in-order-to-collect-more-tax/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>HMRC delays</title>
		<link>http://eicg.co.uk/hmrc-what-are-they-up-to/hmrc-delays</link>
		<comments>http://eicg.co.uk/hmrc-what-are-they-up-to/hmrc-delays#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jul 2010 07:39:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brenda</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[HMRC - what are they up to?]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employer compliance review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employer compliance reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employment status reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC delays]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC tax compliance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC tax investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAYE investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAYE/NIC investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax enquiries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax enquiry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax investigations]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eicg.co.uk/?p=135</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The current delays within HMRC are getting ridiculous and it&#8217;s not just the taxpayers that are having problems, even professional tax advisers are having problems. Sue Moore, associate director for BTT and A, has been struggling to get hold of anyone at HMRC. &#8220;We&#8217;re having difficulties when dealing with the HMRC. It would seem that [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px;">
			<a href="http://api.tweetmeme.com/share?url=http%3A%2F%2Feicg.co.uk%2Fhmrc-what-are-they-up-to%2Fhmrc-delays"><br />
				<img src="http://api.tweetmeme.com/imagebutton.gif?url=http%3A%2F%2Feicg.co.uk%2Fhmrc-what-are-they-up-to%2Fhmrc-delays&amp;style=normal&amp;b=2" height="61" width="50" /><br />
			</a>
		</div>
<p>The current delays within HMRC are getting ridiculous and it&#8217;s not just the taxpayers that are having problems, even professional tax advisers are having problems.</p>
<p>Sue Moore, associate director for  BTT and A, has been struggling to get hold of  anyone at HMRC.</p>
<p>&#8220;<em>We&#8217;re having difficulties when dealing with  the HMRC. It would seem that most offices are eight weeks behind  dealing with post. When you telephone it is just the call centre and if  you want to speak to somebody actually dealing with the case, that is  almost impossible. All this was before the cuts in the department  spending.</p>
<p>Everybody is affected by the delay. Issues take longer  to resolve and cost the clients more in professional fees as we have to  keep chasing HMRC. Working on a case is very inefficient as we have to  pick up the threads of the case after several months&#8217; delay.</em>&#8221;</p>
<p>Now we are finding that we are having to escalate matters in order to get a response to correspondence which is no good for anyone</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://eicg.co.uk/hmrc-what-are-they-up-to/hmrc-delays/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Late filing penalties for PAYE, NIC and CIS</title>
		<link>http://eicg.co.uk/cis/late-filing-penalties-for-paye-nic-and-cis</link>
		<comments>http://eicg.co.uk/cis/late-filing-penalties-for-paye-nic-and-cis#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jul 2010 08:56:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brenda</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[CIS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC - what are they up to?]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC penalties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAYE/NIC/CIS Penalties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tax Investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CIS late filing penalties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CIS penalties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employer compliance review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employer compliance reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[late filing penalties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAYE/NIC PENALTIES]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAYE/NIC/CIS late filing]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eicg.co.uk/?p=133</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[HMRC announced in June that Extra Statuory Concession B46 (ESC B46) allowing a seven-day grace period for late employers’ and contractors’ returns will cease from 31 March 2011. ESC B46 established the principle that penalties would not be charged when employers and contractors submitting tax returns and CIS forms had taken “all reasonable steps” to [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px;">
			<a href="http://api.tweetmeme.com/share?url=http%3A%2F%2Feicg.co.uk%2Fcis%2Flate-filing-penalties-for-paye-nic-and-cis"><br />
				<img src="http://api.tweetmeme.com/imagebutton.gif?url=http%3A%2F%2Feicg.co.uk%2Fcis%2Flate-filing-penalties-for-paye-nic-and-cis&amp;style=normal&amp;b=2" height="61" width="50" /><br />
			</a>
		</div>
<p>HMRC announced in June that Extra Statuory Concession B46 (ESC  B46) allowing a seven-day grace period for late employers’ and  contractors’ returns will cease from 31 March 2011.</p>
<p>ESC B46 established the principle that penalties  would not be charged when employers and contractors submitting tax  returns and CIS forms had taken “all reasonable steps” to file their  returns on time, but were not able to do so due to unforeseen  circumstances such as postal delays.</p>
<p>With the advent of online filing, which is required for P35s and P14s  and will become mandatory for Corporation Tax returns from 1 April,  HMRC considers the concession to be “redundant” because the delays it  was intended to address will no longer happen. Returns must therefore  reach the department by their due date or incur a late filing penalty of  £100.</p>
<p>Confirming the new penalty regime HMRC explained: “Any customers filing a return late will, as  now, be able to request us to remove any penalty, if they believe they  had a reasonable excuse for the delay in filing. We will consider every  case on its own merits. Customers can also appeal against the penalty to  a Tribunal.”</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://eicg.co.uk/cis/late-filing-penalties-for-paye-nic-and-cis/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

