<?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 &#187; HMRC tax compliance visits</title>
	<atom:link href="http://eicg.co.uk/tag/hmrc-tax-compliance-visits/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://eicg.co.uk</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress site</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 10:32:58 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
<atom:link rel="hub" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com"/><atom:link rel="hub" href="http://superfeedr.com/hubbub"/>		<item>
		<title>HMRC Tax Investigations boosted by Tax Discovery case</title>
		<link>http://eicg.co.uk/eicg/hmrc-tax-investigations-boosted-by-tax-discovery-case/</link>
		<comments>http://eicg.co.uk/eicg/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[<p><a href="http://www.eicg.co.uk" class="broken_link">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/eicg/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/eicg/real-time-information/</link>
		<comments>http://eicg.co.uk/eicg/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[<p>HMRC is to change its <a href="http://www.eicg.co.uk" class="broken_link">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/eicg/real-time-information/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Business Record Checks</title>
		<link>http://eicg.co.uk/employment-tax-experts/business-record-checks/</link>
		<comments>http://eicg.co.uk/employment-tax-experts/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[<p></a>During a business records check (BRC) an HMRC officer will view the <a href="http://www.eicg.co.uk" class="broken_link">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/employment-tax-experts/business-record-checks/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>Documents relating to tax enquiries and <a href="http://www.eicg.co.uk" class="broken_link">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" class="broken_link"><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>Construction Industry (CIS) Review offer</title>
		<link>http://eicg.co.uk/cis/construction-industry-cis-review-offer/</link>
		<comments>http://eicg.co.uk/cis/construction-industry-cis-review-offer/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 May 2011 12:18:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brenda</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[CIS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Construction Industry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Employment Status]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC - what are they up to?]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAYE/NIC/CIS Penalties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[business record check]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[business records check]]></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 reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employment status]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employment status review]]></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[HMRC tax compliance visits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[in year business record check]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://eicg.co.uk/?p=244</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[EICG are offering a menu of Construction Industry Scheme (CIS) reviews for your company at special rates until 30 June 2011 HMRC are being very proactive in this area, even for companies that have previously been under the radar. You could be caught out whether this be via an employer compliance review, an employment status [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>EICG are offering a menu of Construction Industry Scheme (CIS) reviews for your company at special rates until 30 June 2011</p>
<p>HMRC are being very proactive in this area, even for companies that have previously been under the radar. You could be caught out whether this be via an employer compliance review, an <a href="http://www.eicg.co.uk/employment-status" class="broken_link">employment status review</a> or an in year business records check. The costs of getting things wrong can be monumental, not just the penalties but also the time taken out of your business and the resulting stress that this can cause.</p>
<p>So why wait, choose your review option below and contact 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>
<ul>
<li>Employment status review of your subcontractors and associated paperwork</li>
<li>Review of all aspects of your Construction Industry compliance</li>
<li>Business record checks</li>
<li>Full <a href="http://www.eicg.co.uk" class="broken_link">Employer compliance review</a>, as HMRC would conduct them</li>
</ul>
<p>Make your company the one that HMRC walks away from rather than feasting on your hard earned profits.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://eicg.co.uk/cis/construction-industry-cis-review-offer/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>HMRC are desparate for cash &#8211; surprise!!!</title>
		<link>http://eicg.co.uk/cis/hmrc-are-desparate-for-cash-surprise/</link>
		<comments>http://eicg.co.uk/cis/hmrc-are-desparate-for-cash-surprise/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jul 2010 11:51:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brenda</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[CIS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC - what are they up to?]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tax Investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Aspect enquiry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CIS review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[compliance audits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cross Tax Enquiry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employer compliance review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employer compliance reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employment status]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employment status reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC cross tax reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC tax compliance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC tax compliance visits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC tax investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAYE investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAYE/NIC investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[subcontractor status]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax investigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax investigations]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eicg.co.uk/?p=131</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[HMRC are now out and about big style as they have told their Inspectors to bring in as much money as possible, as quickly as possible, which is not really surprising given the current economic environment.  There will be pressure to settle long running full enquiry cases and Inspectors will be encouraged to take up [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>HMRC are now out and about big style as they have told their Inspectors to bring in as much money as possible, as quickly as possible, which is not really surprising given the current economic environment.  There will be pressure to settle long running full enquiry cases and Inspectors will be encouraged to take up aspect cases (these are as they sound, looking at a particular aspect of a business, eg <a href="http://eicg.co.uk/employment-status" class="broken_link">employment status</a>, entertaining expenditure etc ) which are likely to be settled more quickly to optimise the tax yield in the current fiscal year.</p>
<p>Interestingly, it would appear that the new &#8220;Cross Tax&#8221; enquiry framework, involving PAYE/NIC, Corporation Tax, VAT etc is being shelved as it is slowing up the enquiry process so Inspectors will be reverting to just working their particular area</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://eicg.co.uk/cis/hmrc-are-desparate-for-cash-surprise/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Virtual Tax Investigation meetings!</title>
		<link>http://eicg.co.uk/hmrc-what-are-they-up-to/virtual-tax-investigation-meetings/</link>
		<comments>http://eicg.co.uk/hmrc-what-are-they-up-to/virtual-tax-investigation-meetings/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Jul 2010 11:22:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brenda</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[HMRC - what are they up to?]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tax Investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employer compliance review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employer compliance reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employment status reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC tax compliance visits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC tax investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAYE investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAYE/NIC investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax enquiry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax investigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax investigations]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eicg.co.uk/?p=129</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Now we&#8217;ve all heard of how much money HMRC needs/should bring in with tax investigations, employment status reviews, PAYE investigations etc and as soon as possible you would think. Well, this morning was a relevation, in an attempt to speed up an enquiry I had agreed with the investigating officer that it would be a [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Now we&#8217;ve all heard of how much money HMRC needs/should bring in with <a href="http://eicg.co.uk/tax-investigations" class="broken_link">tax investigations</a>, <a href="http://eicg.co.uk/employment-status" class="broken_link">employment status </a>reviews, PAYE investigations etc and as soon as possible you would think. Well, this morning was a relevation, in an attempt to speed up an enquiry I had agreed with the investigating officer that it would be a good idea to have a meeting, at our offices to go through the information they required, no problem until this morning. The very apologetic investigating officer explained that they had been told that due to all the cutbacks they were unable to travel for a meeting and would have to deal with the enquiry via correspondence and telephone. After checking it wasn&#8217;t 1st of April I said that this made no sense as this would prolong the enquiry because of HMRC backlogs etc to which to be fair the officer completely agreed, so what is going on &#8211; is this just a daft local decision or something more widespread?</p>
<p>HMRC you need to wake up and use some common sense &#8211; meetings can speed up the whole process &#8211; you are investigating someone or some entity, so they shouldn&#8217;t have to pick up the cost &#8211; you should be prepared to travel and guess what if there is a settlement to be made the money will be in the coffers quicker and the officers involved will be free to move onto another case &#8211; simples!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://eicg.co.uk/hmrc-what-are-they-up-to/virtual-tax-investigation-meetings/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>22 June 2010 &#8211; PAYE/NIC increases to be announced</title>
		<link>http://eicg.co.uk/hmrc-what-are-they-up-to/22-june-2010-payenic-increases-to-be-announced/</link>
		<comments>http://eicg.co.uk/hmrc-what-are-they-up-to/22-june-2010-payenic-increases-to-be-announced/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 May 2010 08:34:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brenda</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[HMRC - what are they up to?]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tax Advice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tax Investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Employees national insurance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employer compliance review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employer compliance reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Employers NIC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC tax compliance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC tax compliance visits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC tax investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAYE investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAYE/NIC investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax investigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax investigations]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eicg.co.uk/tax-advice-blog/?p=90</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Well we have a date for the emergency Budget and that is 22 June 2010, but what can we expect: Increases in employees national insurance contributions, but not employers NIC Increase in the rate of Capital Gains Tax to probably 40% VAT rate to increase from 17.5% to 20% Increase in the level of PAYE/NIC [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well we have a date for the emergency Budget and that is 22 June 2010, but what can we expect:</p>
<ul>
<li>Increases in employees national insurance contributions, but not employers NIC</li>
<li>Increase in the rate of Capital Gains Tax to probably 40%</li>
<li>VAT rate to increase from 17.5% to 20%</li>
<li>Increase in the level of <a href="http://eicg.co.uk/tax-investigations" class="broken_link">PAYE/NIC compliance checks</a></li>
<li>Increase in the personal allowance level to nearer the £10,000 mark</li>
<li>A crack down on tax evasion, albeit HMRC cannot seemingly tell the difference between this and tax avoidance &#8211; the latter being perfectly legal</li>
</ul>
<p>The Government has indicated that most of the initial debt reduction will come from spending cuts rather than tax rises but we would recommend that you review all your employer compliance procedures with the help of an employment tax expert as they will be seeking extra revenue from basically whereever it can get it from &#8211; so call us today on 0800 917 9176 and see how we can save you money</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://eicg.co.uk/hmrc-what-are-they-up-to/22-june-2010-payenic-increases-to-be-announced/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>HMRC tax enquiries and penalties</title>
		<link>http://eicg.co.uk/hmrc-what-are-they-up-to/hmrc-tax-enquiries-and-penalties/</link>
		<comments>http://eicg.co.uk/hmrc-what-are-they-up-to/hmrc-tax-enquiries-and-penalties/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Mar 2010 13:11:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brenda</dc:creator>
				<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[employer compliance review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employer compliance reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employment status reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC penalties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC tax compliance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC tax compliance visits]]></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/tax-advice-blog/?p=35</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[HMRC have recently published details of their internal review of tax enquiries, employer compliance reviews, tax investigations etc in relation to cases that have occurred since 1 April 2009 which does make for interesting reading: &#8220;Outcomes excluding penalty cases 3,443 cases out of 18,526 Upheld: review complete – 2,603 (76 per cent) Deemed Upheld: time [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>HMRC have recently published details of their internal review of tax enquiries, <a href="http://eicg.co.uk/tax-investigations" class="broken_link">employer compliance reviews</a>, tax investigations etc in relation to cases that have occurred since 1 April 2009 which does make for interesting reading:</p>
<p><em>&#8220;<strong>Outcomes excluding penalty cases 3,443 cases out of 18,526</strong></em></p>
<p><em><strong></strong>Upheld:  review complete – 2,603 (76 per cent)<br />
Deemed Upheld: time limit  expired – 20 (1 per cent)<br />
Varied – 349 (10 per cent)<br />
HMRC decision  cancelled &#8211; 471 (14 per cent)</p>
<p><strong>Outcomes penalty cases  15,083 cases out of 18,526</strong></em></p>
<p><em><strong></strong><br />
Upheld: review complete – 6,281  (42 per cent)<br />
Deemed upheld: time limit expired – 48 (0 per cent)<br />
Varied  – 793 (5 per cent)<br />
HMRC notice cancelled – 7,961 (53 per cent)</em>&#8221;</p>
<p>In basic english this means that <strong>24%</strong> of non penalty cases were varied  or cancelled and a staggering <strong>58%</strong> of penalty cases were varied or  cancelled</p>
<p>The results clearly show that it is in your interest whether you are an individual or a company (where there is reason to doubt HMRC&#8217;s assessment) to  complain. We would also add that it is advisable to obtain <strong>specialist</strong> help when HMRC comes a calling, it&#8217;s not a time to dabble so give us a call on 0800 917 9176</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://eicg.co.uk/hmrc-what-are-they-up-to/hmrc-tax-enquiries-and-penalties/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>HMRC Tax Compliance &#8211; be very aware!</title>
		<link>http://eicg.co.uk/hmrc-what-are-they-up-to/hmrc-tax-compliance-be-very-aware/</link>
		<comments>http://eicg.co.uk/hmrc-what-are-they-up-to/hmrc-tax-compliance-be-very-aware/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Mar 2010 12:21:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brenda</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[HMRC - what are they up to?]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tax Advice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tax Investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Construction Industry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employer compliance review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC tax compliance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC tax compliance visits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMRC tax investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAYE investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAYE/NIC healthcheck]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PAYE/NIC investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax debt]]></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://www.eicg.co.uk/tax-advice-blog/?p=33</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There are still a number of individuals and companies out there that think the Inland Revenue won&#8217;t pursue them to the ends of the earth regarding tax debts &#8211; you need to wake up, seriously! HMRC compliance visits and tax investigations take on real significance when you focus on HMRC&#8217;s mission to maximise tax take, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There are still a number of individuals and companies out there that think the Inland Revenue won&#8217;t pursue them to the ends of the earth regarding tax debts &#8211; you need to wake up, seriously!</p>
<p><a href="http://eicg.co.uk/tax-investigations" class="broken_link">HMRC compliance visits </a>and tax investigations take on real significance when you focus on HMRC&#8217;s mission to maximise tax take, as such its stated litigation  settlement strategy (LSS) aims to push for a <strong>full settlement or court  action</strong> <strong>if it believes it has a better than 50/50 chance of winning.</strong></p>
<p>Now the issue is always the fact that HMRC have deep pockets when it comes to arguements, you only have to look at some of the <a href="http://eicg.co.uk/employment-status" class="broken_link">employment status</a> cases that have taken 3/5 years to conclude but the cost in terms of money, time and effort  expended by HMRC (and delayed cash flow for the government&#8217;s coffers &#8211; this is most likely the issue)  in pursuing these disputes is mounting.</p>
<p>Therefore some in HMRC  are considering using a more &#8220;common sense&#8221; approach &#8211; can it be possible?</p>
<p>A new unit would split the dispute resolution unit from the anti avoidance division. The  mission of the new unit would be to resolve the disputes more quickly;  thus improving cash flow, even if the speedier resolution means a lower  tax bill &#8211; I can&#8217;t see that being popular within HMRC, can you? So stick with the principle of getting things as correct as possible in the first place and if you&#8217;re not sure give us a call on 0800 917 9176 as a PAYE/NIC healthcheck could save your company, in more ways than one!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://eicg.co.uk/hmrc-what-are-they-up-to/hmrc-tax-compliance-be-very-aware/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

