In Maypine Construction v HMRC [2017] UKFTT 833 (19 December 2016) the FTT found that the appellant had failed to take reasonable care in complying with the Construction Industry Scheme (CIS).
The issue was whether for the purpose of the Income Tax (CIS) Regulations 2005 reg 9(3) Maypine as a contractor which had failed to make deductions from subcontractors had taken reasonable care to comply with FA 2004 s 61 and the Regulations.
The FTT noted that the onus was on Maypine to show that it had taken reasonable care. It accepted that Maypine had made the relevant errors in good faith and had not benefited financially from them. It added however that the required standard of care was proportionate to the taxpayer’s business. Maypine was not a small company that was dealing with CIS on an occasional...
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:
In Maypine Construction v HMRC [2017] UKFTT 833 (19 December 2016) the FTT found that the appellant had failed to take reasonable care in complying with the Construction Industry Scheme (CIS).
The issue was whether for the purpose of the Income Tax (CIS) Regulations 2005 reg 9(3) Maypine as a contractor which had failed to make deductions from subcontractors had taken reasonable care to comply with FA 2004 s 61 and the Regulations.
The FTT noted that the onus was on Maypine to show that it had taken reasonable care. It accepted that Maypine had made the relevant errors in good faith and had not benefited financially from them. It added however that the required standard of care was proportionate to the taxpayer’s business. Maypine was not a small company that was dealing with CIS on an occasional...
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:
