.png)
.png)
The case of Lee Barrett shows how much easier this job would be if it weren't for the clients, says MIKE TRUMAN
KEY POINTS
- Reed v Clark is not an easy case to interpret so the facts need to be followed.
- Bank records will show the use and location of ATM machines etc.
- The importance of and requirements for a 'distinct break'.
- The need to retain objective evidence of leaving the UK before 6 April.
The worst question that clients ask when you are advising them about residence (apart from 'are you sure about that?' ...) is 'how will HMRC know whether I've been in the UK?'
In the past I normally explained just how much information HMRC received from jealous neighbours but these days it is the electronic trail we leave behind us that is likely to be followed by an HMRC cyber-bloodhound.
It was certainly the major problem for Mr Lee Barrett when he...
Alternatively, you can register free of charge to read a limited amount of subscriber content per month.
Once you have registered, you will receive an email directing you back to read this item in full.
Please reach out to customer services at +44 (0) 330 161 1234 or 'customer.services@lexisnexis.co.uk' for further assistance.
