Patrick Ashe v The Commissioners for HMRC
Decision date: 22 June 2023
Neutral citation: [2023] UKFTT 538 (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 HMRC discovery assessments for the High Income Child Benefit Charge (HICBC) for 2015/16–2018/19 and related failure-to-notify penalties. The Tribunal found Mr Ashe was unaware of HICBC until HMRC's 7 Jan 2021 nudge, that an alleged 2013 SA252 was not shown to have been received, and that he acted promptly once notified. The Tribunal allowed the appeals for 2015/16 and 2016/17 (assessments time-barred), stayed the 2017/18 and 2018/19 appeals pending related litigation, and cancelled all failure-to-notify penalties.
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
Where a taxpayer had no prior filing obligation, did not receive any effective notification from HMRC (including an SA252), and remedied the position promptly once alerted, ignorance of the HICBC obligation can amount to a reasonable excuse such that discovery assessments for earlier years are time-barred and penalties for failure to notify are not sustainable.
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 suggested as an observation that it would be unduly favourable to HMRC to treat invalid assessments as restarting penalty time limits immediately; a fairer approach might allow HMRC a 12-month period from confirmation of an assessment's validity to raise penalties. The Tribunal also noted that the statutory "protected appeal" regime operates to HMRC’s advantage in practice.