This week's opinion: 9 May 2019

I confess that when HMRC first issued its toolkits ten years ago I did not have much enthusiasm for them. They seemed patronising in tone and had more than a hint of ‘teaching your grandmother how to suck eggs’. I do not think I was alone in that. HMRC has persisted with them and some 2018-19 editions have recently been published (tinyurl.com/hmrctoolkits).

Perhaps I have grown more generous in my old age but I was quite impressed by some of these latest iterations. I am not sure the checklists contained in them are particularly useful, but the main narrative material seems fairly comprehensive and the cross-references to other material are helpful. The toolkits are one-sided in that they look largely at risks to the exchequer rather than the risks that income is overstated but if, like me, you have dismissed the toolkits in the past, you might want to take another look.

I appreciate that many readers might take the view that HMRC shouldn’t be devoting time and resources in (as they see it) telling agents how to do their job and I understand this but, on balance, I think that there is a role for HMRC in producing support material of this nature.

It would be a matter of extreme concern if the use of these toolkits were ever to become compulsory – there was the suggestion when they were introduced that this might happen – but, as long as advisers are free to use the material as they see fit, I think they are a worthwhile venture.

If you do one thing…

Do some of your clients keep an appeal open even if they know that there is no real chance of success? Read the First-tier Tribunal decision in Marshall Glover (TC7110) to see how this tactic can sometimes come back to bite them.