The Commissioners for HMRC v PNO Group Limited (in liquidation)

Decision date: 11 December 2025

Neutral citation: [2025] UKFTT 1539 (TC)

Overall AI summary confidence: high

AI Notice: Any short overview, ratio decidendi summary or obiter dicta summary shown on this page is AI-generated, provided only to help users assess potential relevance more quickly, and may be wholly inaccurate. No liability is accepted for the accuracy of any such summary, regardless of any AI confidence rating shown. Users should check the underlying decision and obtain appropriate legal advice rather than relying on any summary.

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

HMRC applied for a promoter disclosure penalty under DOTAS against PNO Group Ltd (in liquidation) for failing to notify notifiable arrangements. The Tribunal held the PNO arrangements were notifiable under Regulation 10, that PNO was a promoter, and that it failed to notify from 1 September 2017 until 14 January 2021. The Tribunal imposed an enhanced penalty of £1,000,000.

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 treated standardised documentary arrangements made available to multiple persons as falling within Regulation 10 and therefore as notifiable arrangements; it treated a promoter as an entity that makes such a proposal available and organises/manages the standardised arrangements enabling users to implement them. The Tribunal also accepted that where a calculated penalty based on promoter fees would substantially exceed the statutory daily maximum, the penalty may be increased (up to £1,000,000) for deterrence where proportionate.

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 decision noted (obiter) that the promoter-disclosure penalty targets the failure to provide prescribed information and is not itself a mechanism to recover unpaid tax, and that assessment of promoter fees for deterrence should reflect economic reality (distinguishing turnover from profit).