ADM Glass v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs
Decision date: 20 May 2011
Neutral citation: [2011] UKFTT 339 (TC)
Overall AI summary confidence: high
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: high
ADM Southern Ltd, already in the default surcharge regime, filed a VAT return for period 11/10 and paid by BACS; HMRC received the payment after the extended due date and imposed a 15% default surcharge. The tribunal held ADM did not have a reasonable excuse for late payment, noting prior HMRC correspondence had warned that BACS payments take at least three working days to clear. The appeal against the surcharge was dismissed.
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: high
A taxpayer previously warned by HMRC that BACS payments take at least three working days to clear cannot reasonably rely on ignorance of that clearing time, and compliance depends on HMRC's timely receipt of the electronic payment (receipt by HMRC, not merely debit from the payer's account, determines whether the extended payment deadline is met).
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: medium
The tribunal noted (non-bindingly) that HMRC's practice of not participating in Faster Payments may shape taxpayers' expectations about electronic clearing times, and that cancellation of a prior surcharge coupled with a warning can be relevant background when assessing the reasonableness of later conduct.
Warning
Text is repetitive within the chunk; facts are reiterated verbatim.