Discovery continues to be an area in which the ‘devil is in the detail’ and case law developments tweak our understanding of the tests and their application to real cases. HMRC v Hicks [2020] UKUT 12 is the latest Upper Tribunal (UT) decision to explore discovery’s complexities. Whilst it was expected to clarify who is considered to ‘act on behalf of’ a taxpayer it sheds light on what agents should do to avoid being considered careless as well as how to test the adequacy of disclosures seeking to protect taxpayers against discovery.
All references to ‘section’ in the text below are references to sections in TMA 1970 unless otherwise stated.
The situation in Hicks
Mr...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
Discovery continues to be an area in which the ‘devil is in the detail’ and case law developments tweak our understanding of the tests and their application to real cases. HMRC v Hicks [2020] UKUT 12 is the latest Upper Tribunal (UT) decision to explore discovery’s complexities. Whilst it was expected to clarify who is considered to ‘act on behalf of’ a taxpayer it sheds light on what agents should do to avoid being considered careless as well as how to test the adequacy of disclosures seeking to protect taxpayers against discovery.
All references to ‘section’ in the text below are references to sections in TMA 1970 unless otherwise stated.
The situation in Hicks
Mr...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes: