John Sharp v The Commissioners for HMRC
Decision date: 1 September 2023
Neutral citation: [2023] UKFTT 746 (TC)
Overall AI summary confidence: medium
Short overview
This short overview is intended to summarise the case, issues and outcome so far as they are supported by the judgment.
AI confidence in this short overview: medium
This appeal concerned HMRC discovery assessments for the High Income Child Benefit Charge (HICBC) for 2014/15–2017/18 and Schedule 41 penalties for failure to notify under s7 TMA. The Tribunal found Mr Sharp’s adjusted net income exceeded £50,000 in each year, upheld the discovery assessments as compliant with time limits (including as affected by FA 2022), and dismissed his reasonable-excuse defence to the notification penalties, reducing the penalty to the maximum permitted reduction (20%).
Ratio decidendi
This summary is intended to identify the ratio decidendi, meaning the legal reasons for deciding and the binding part of the decision.
AI confidence in this ratio decidendi summary: medium
The Tribunal applied FA 2022’s retrospective amendment to permit discovery assessments for HICBC where the taxpayer had not raised the Wilkes challenge by 30 June 2021, and held that a taxpayer’s ignorance can only be a reasonable excuse up to the point at which, given their attributes and conduct (including prior use of agents and later self-assessment filings), it was objectively reasonable for them to have become aware of the liability.
Obiter dicta
This summary is intended to identify obiter dicta, meaning observations made by the way that were not necessary to deciding the case and are not binding.
AI confidence in this obiter dicta summary: low
The judgment commented that HMRC publicity in 2012–13 directed at higher-rate taxpayers has limited relevance where the appellant was not then a higher-rate taxpayer, and observed that while penalties may engage Article 7 ECHR for Convention purposes, retrospective amendments enabling collection of ordinary tax liabilities do not of themselves render such measures unlawful.
Warning
The chunk contains extensive repetition of material (duplicated passages), which may make reading and extraction of points cumbersome. Notes contain duplicated material and may be somewhat noisy; key facts and reasoning appear extractable but the record is not a complete transcript.