Richard King v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs
Decision date: 21 January 2010
Neutral citation: [2010] UKFTT 79 (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 case concerns Richard King’s appeal against 150 fixed penalties totalling £17,600 for 21 late monthly CIS returns (May 2007–Jan 2009). The Tribunal found Mr King did not have a “reasonable excuse” for any of the defaults, upheld the penalties, and dismissed the appeal. HMRC had reviewed the penalties and communicated the result; no further review duty was found.
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 held that, under the CIS fixed-penalty regime, penalties can only be set aside or mitigated on the ground of a “reasonable excuse,” and any such excuse must apply for the whole period of each default. Matters such as absence of financial loss to HMRC or proportionality of the penalties are not relevant to establishing a reasonable excuse in this statutory scheme.
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 described “reasonable excuse” (not defined in statute) as typically exceptional events beyond the taxpayer’s control (for example severe illness or bereavement). It also noted there is no statutory obligation on HMRC to conduct further reviews beyond communicating the outcome of their review.