Julian & Anor v The Commissioners for HMRC
Decision date: 28 January 2026
Neutral citation: [2026] UKFTT 159 (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
This appeal concerned a Schedule 41 penalty for failure to notify VAT registration after changes to the Agricultural Flat Rate Scheme (AFRS). The Tribunal found the appellants and their long‑standing generalist accountant were unaware of the AFRS changes, that it was objectively reasonable for them to be unaware given the manner of publication, and accordingly allowed the appeal and set aside the penalty.
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
The Tribunal treated ignorance as a potential reasonable excuse where significant legislative changes were obscurely published; if changes are buried in specialist documents aimed at practitioners, it may be objectively reasonable for ordinary taxpayers and generalist advisers not to know of them. The assessment of reasonable excuse is objective and takes account of the taxpayer’s attributes and conduct.
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 judgment observed that HMRC is not obliged to notify every taxpayer personally of legislative changes and noted that expecting taxpayers or their agents to trawl HMRC’s website or contact HMRC periodically is unrealistic; such observations were not necessary to decide the appeal.