.png)
.png)
Filing madness
Along with my illustrious colleagues on Taxation magazine, I decided on 29 January 2005 that maybe now would be a good time to file my 2003-04 tax return, writes Allison Plager.
Having registered to file online a few days earlier, and having received my activation number promptly from the Revenue in under a week, I thought it would be good to file online.
The main advantages to me would be that the tax calculation would be done for me, and I would be able to send the return and receive confirmation of receipt instantaneously. Well, the tax calculation did get done, and was the amount I had anticipated.
As for instantaneous confirmation of receipt that the return had been successfully received by the Revenue. I pressed the submission button at about 8 pm on 29 January, and got back a message saying that my return was being submitted, but that the process could take a while.
Eventually, I received an e-mail confirming receipt at 6.33 am on 31 January. All right, so it worked. But what about the mental distress caused to me (and to my husband)?
At various times on Sunday 30 January I checked the online filing pages on the Revenue website to see if the return had been received.
According to my tax return status, the return was still outstanding and I had no tax to pay. This was not what I wanted to see, but at least it was something; in the evening it was not possible to access the online filing pages at all.
Yet, nothing on the Revenue website indicated that there were problems, and the helpline was closed. Finally, it dawned on me that the obvious place to check what was going on was Tax Zone on AccountingWeb.
There it was, a story entitled 'Tax advisers fume as SA Online falls over'. I was not alone.
It is all very well for the Government and the Revenue to exhort taxpayers to file their self-assessment tax returns online.
However, the system has got to be robust enough to cope with huge surges of use.
The 31 January deadline is no secret, and it is also no secret that a huge number of taxpayers leave it until the very last minute to file their returns.
Nothing is going to change this, and perhaps nothing should, since it is the taxpayer's right to file his return when he chooses within that 31 January deadline.
The Revenue should be relieved that a significant number of taxpayers file early.
Filing online is a marvellous way of submitting a return, or at least it should be.
Believe it or not, saddo that I am, I was almost excited about submitting my tax return this year because I was using the online system for the first time. So imagine my disappointment(!) when it did not appear to work (and my relief at knowing that it finally had worked this morning).
The Revenue maintains that it was weight of traffic using the system that caused the delays in sending confirmation that returns had been submitted, and that it does advise taxpayers 'where possible to avoid peak times'.
IIn fact, the spokesman I talked to, had not realised that there had been any problems at all, but did say that towards the end of the week 35,000 had logged on to the online system.
This is not the point. I have a right to file when I choose to meet the deadline, using one of the methods available, and for the selected method to be available and working. It is not satisfactory to say that any system buckles under pressure.
There is a £100 penalty to be paid if the tax return is late, so the very least that the Revenue can do is to ensure that its systems can bear up.
Just like the leaves falling every autumn seems to take the train operators by surprise, the Revenue seems to be surprised that the few days leading up to 31 January will be extremely busy.
At least for self assessment, it is not mandatory to file online. Certain employers must file their end of year returns online, and ultimately all employers will have to.
Will the system for PAYE be sufficiently robust to cope with this, given that employers have considerably less time to file their returns than individual taxpayers?
It is just not good enough.
Congratulations!
The Chartered Institute of Taxation announced that 256 (37%) out of a total of 695 of candidates passed its November examinations, with 89 being referred.
Two candidates were awarded distinctions. The Institute Medal for the best overall performance across all four papers was awarded to Helen Lewis who is employed by Francis Clark, Exeter.
The Association of Taxation Technicians has also announced the results of its November examinations. 251 (61%) of the 414 candidates who sat the examination passed. Distinctions were awarded to 16 candidates.
US regulations
Extensive new regulations affecting virtually every person who provides written US tax advice, including electronic communications, have been issued by the US Treasury in final form and will become effective on 21 June 2005. According to lawyers Brian Cave LLP, key points include:
-
Practitioners providing opinions in relation to certain tax avoidance transactions must identify in the written advice all the relevant facts, relate the applicable law to those facts and reach a conclusion with respect to each significant federal tax issue.
-
The use of the word 'opinion' in the regulations is not limited to legal opinions, rather it is used generally to mean any written tax advice.
-
Many of the substantive requirements can be avoided in certain opinions if the 'practitioner prominently discloses in the written advice that it was not intended or written by the practitioner to be used, and that it cannot be used by the taxpayer, for the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be imposed on the taxpayer'.
-
The substantive requirements cannot be reduced in the case of written advice relating to arrangements having a 'principal' purpose of tax avoidance or evasion; written advice relating to listed transactions; written advice subject to conditions of confidentiality or contractual protection.
-
Minimum standards are also set for written advice that does not constitute a 'covered opinion'. This type of written advice is not required to discuss all relevant facts and issues, but still may not be based on unreasonable factual or legal assumptions, may not unreasonably rely upon representations, statements, findings, or agreements of the taxpayer or any other person, may not fail to consider all relevant facts, and may not take into account the possibility that a tax return will not be audited, that an issue will not be raised on audit, or that an issue will be settled.
Further details can be obtained from Dyke M Davies, tel: 020 7246 5840, dmdavies@bryancave.com, or Charlotte Pepper, tel: 020 7246 5865, charlotte.pepper@bryancave.com.
--------------------
For a comprehensive review of tax vacancies in London, the South East and Nationwide please call 020 7257 6500 or visit www.purerecruitment.com The leading specialist tax recruiter.
