Thomas Cruise v The Commissioners for HMRC
Decision date: 14 November 2022
Neutral citation: [2023] UKFTT 41 (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 concerned Schedule 55 FA 2009 penalties for late filing of a 2019/20 self-assessment return by Mr Thomas Cruise. HMRC relied on electronic notices and email alerts sent to his verified Personal Tax Account; the Tribunal found those notices were duly issued, that Mr Cruise had no reasonable excuse for late filing, and that HMRC’s refusal to reduce penalties for special circumstances was not irrational. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal and upheld the penalties.
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 has registered for HMRC online services and provided a verified email, electronic notices and email alerts recorded on HMRC systems can be treated as duly issued for the purposes of Schedule 55; and a failure to check a registered Personal Tax Account or to open email alerts does not, without more, constitute a reasonable excuse for late filing.
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
Reliance on an accountant will not amount to a reasonable excuse unless the taxpayer shows they took reasonable care to avoid the failure (for example by giving clear instructions or taking other steps); and the Tribunal should not substitute its own view on special circumstances unless the decision under challenge is irrational in the Wednesbury sense.