Taxation logo taxation mission text

Since 1927 the leading authority on tax law, practice and administration

This week's opinion: 2 July 2020

30 June 2020 / Andrew Hubbard
Issue: 4750 / Categories: Comment & Analysis
Evidence is vital when claiming R&D

Afew months ago (27 February 2020, page 5) I wrote about the problems with research and development (R&D) claims raised by the National Audit Office in its report about tax reliefs. 

I was reminded of this when reading a recent First-tier Tribunal decision, AHK Recruitment Ltd (TC7718), relating to an unsuccessful R&D claim. I know nothing about the background and can rely only on the published report, but it seems to me that this is a good illustration of some of the problems that can arise with these claims. Nobody from the company appeared as a witness before the tribunal to give evidence about the project. Although the tribunal did not doubt their honesty, the explanations by the R&D specialist who alerted the company to the possibility of the claim – they were not the company’s usual advisers – failed to give any clear indication about the basis on which the claim was made. Nor was anybody able to produce an analysis of the costs included within the claim.

It may have been that the company was due relief. But this case does show the importance of underpinning claims with evidence. The interesting question is whether there should be a stricter requirement for making R&D claims. Should there be accreditation of advisers? Should there be a requirement to provide detailed information with a claim? Should the competent professional with the company who is responsible for the technical work be required to certify the claim?

These are not easy questions and there will be different views, but I believe the issue merits serious discussion.

If you do one thing...

Read the latest HMRC guidance on alternative dispute resolution (tinyurl.com/nnvqct9). The scope of the scheme has been extended to allow a taxpayer to apply for it at any stage of an enquiry. 

Issue: 4750 / Categories: Comment & Analysis
back to top icon