Daniel Cotton v The Commissioners for HMRC
Decision date: 20 November 2025
Neutral citation: [2025] UKFTT 1398 (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
Mr Daniel Cotton received three SEISS payments totaling £8,352 and filed a 2019/20 self‑assessment showing employment as a seafarer with a Seafarers Earnings Deduction and no self‑employment pages. HMRC issued a paragraph 9 Schedule 16 assessment in April 2022 seeking repayment on the basis he was not entitled to SEISS; the First-tier Tribunal found the assessment valid, in time and for the correct amount and dismissed the appeal. The Tribunal held Mr Cotton did not prove he carried on a trade in 2019/20 and the return’s employment information was decisive in the absence of satisfactory contrary evidence.
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’s filed self‑assessment return for the relevant year records employment (here as a seafarer with SED) and does not include trading pages, that return evidence is decisive unless the taxpayer produces satisfactory contrary evidence demonstrating they carried on a trade; under paragraph 9 Schedule 16 HMRC may assess repayment of SEISS payments where an officer considers the recipient was not entitled, and such assessments are subject to the ordinary TMA time limits.
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 indicated that reliance on an accountant’s advice does not absolve a taxpayer from liability for incorrect information on a return, and that letters from a contracting company (or brief confirmations) do not, without contractual or other supporting detail, displace the return’s indication of employment status.