Matthew Jenner v The Commissioners for HMRC
Decision date: 28 June 2022
Neutral citation: [2022] UKFTT 203 (TC)
Overall AI summary confidence: low
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: low
This appeal concerned HMRC Schedule 36 information notices served on Mr Jenner seeking detailed household expenditure and other personal financial documents to check his 2016/17 and 2017/18 tax positions. The Tribunal held HMRC bore the burden of showing requests were "reasonably required," set aside the requirement for detailed household expenditure as disproportionate, but varied and confirmed requests for basic financial information (director's loan analyses, limited details of sums drawn from trusts/others, and personal account schedules/statements under his control). Mr Jenner was directed to comply with the varied requirements within 30 days.
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: low
The Tribunal's ratio is that, on Schedule 36 notices, HMRC must demonstrate that the information or documents requested are "reasonably required" to check a taxpayer's tax position; broadly drafted or disproportionate requests for personal household expenditure can fail that test and amount to an impermissible fishing expedition, whereas basic personal financial information and account statements may be reasonably required to verify declared taxable income.
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 includes observations that HMRC need not exhaust all other information sources before issuing notices, but that this does not permit fishing expeditions; and that requests should be drafted to avoid repetition and to focus on documents within the taxpayer's possession, power or control (with attention to clarity about what "control" means). These remarks are treated as non-binding guidance.
Warning
This chunk contains substantial duplication of passages and repeated material which required consolidation. Notes contain substantial duplication and repeated material; they may be noisy though key findings are reported.