James Greene v The Commissioners for HMRC
Decision date: 26 September 2024
Neutral citation: [2024] UKFTT 872 (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 challenged an HMRC discovery assessment charging Mr Greene income tax on a £36,480 payment said to be an unauthorised pension payment following a QROPS transfer. The First-tier Tribunal held HMRC’s officer validly made a discovery and that Mr Greene failed, on the balance of probabilities, to prove the payment was authorised. The appeal was dismissed, with the assessed tax reduced by agreement to £14,592 (no surcharge).
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’s ratio is that an HMRC officer may validly make a discovery assessment under TMA s.29 based on limited information and informed colleague input so long as a reasonable officer could have the same belief, and that the taxpayer bears the burden of positively establishing that a challenged pension-related payment was authorised; absent sufficient evidence, the assessment will stand.
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 observed that a brief cooling-off right does not necessarily establish market value sufficient to defeat an unauthorised payment charge, and that temporal, transactional and agent links (shared bank account, common corporate addresses/processes, and timing) can support an inference of causal connection between a scheme investment and a subsequent member payment. These comments were not essential to the primary decision.