One minute with David Francis is a Partner at Grant Thornton.
What’s keeping you busy at work?
I am preparing to give evidence in court as an expert witness later this month. Additionally, we are experiencing a more active and challenging approach by HMRC in relation to their assessing time limits and penalties regimes. Establishing taxpayer behaviours has been key in ensuring the law is applied fairly.
What do you know now that you wish you’d known at the start of your career?
Early in my career, I often viewed senior leaders as distant figures, almost superhuman in their capabilities and authority. However, as I progressed, I came to understand that they, too, are human beings with their own strengths, weaknesses and, more often than you’d think, imposter syndrome. Recognising this has allowed me to approach interactions with senior colleagues with greater confidence and empathy, fostering more genuine and productive relationships.
In retrospect, I wish I had started external coaching much earlier in my career. The catalyst for seeking coaching was a personal upheaval – a divorce – which forced me to reevaluate my life and work. However, the benefits of coaching have been profound. It has provided me with invaluable insights, strategies for overcoming challenges, and a supportive sounding board. External coaching has been instrumental in my growth, both personally and professionally, and I believe it can be a game-changer for anyone looking to enhance their leadership capabilities – I wouldn’t be where I am without it!
If you could make one change to tax...
I would bring uniformity to HMRC’s powers across the different taxes at a time where our tax system is already complex.
HMRC have different powers for different taxes. For instance, their authority to investigate or impose penalties varies. By standardising these powers, we would ensure all taxpayers are treated equally, making the system fairer and simpler. As an example, if you want to challenge an indirect tax decision, you usually have to pay the disputed tax upfront unless you can prove financial hardship. This system is unfair and, in my view, can restrict access to justice. It would be better if, rather than having to make a payment upfront, taxpayers instead provided security for the disputed amount or defer payment until the appeal was settled. This would make justice accessible to everyone, regardless of their financial situation.
Additionally, simplifying the appeal process would help taxpayers better navigate it, making the system fairer and more efficient.
Anything interesting in the Budget?
The rate of late payment interest, which now stands at 4% (up from 2.5%) above base rate is punitive and seems akin to a penalty. This is bound to cause more issues in the future whereby certain taxpayers could be pressurised in simply making concessions which were previously unwarranted for fear of paying late payment interest at a significant rate on alleged underdeclared tax.
Previously, taxpayers were able to buy a certificate of deposit and make a payment on account without the Officer leading the enquiry knowing. If the taxpayer emerged victorious, this would be repaid along with repayment interest which represented a much fairer level playing field.
Noticeably, however, the rate of repayment interest from HMRC has remained unchanged from the Budget. The government should remember that the desire to reduce the tax gap should not come at the expense of (innocent) taxpayers being penalised.
Has a recent tax case caught your eye?
Treasures of Brazil Ltd v HMRC [2024] UKFTT 929 (TC) is a useful reminder that in certain circumstances the FTT does have jurisdiction to consider matters of legitimate expectation, which has traditionally been within the remit of the High Court to hear public law arguments.
You might not know this about me but...
I have a rather large family of five children and my wife works for HMRC, which makes for an active household and sometimes adversarial dinner conversations involving tax policy.
One minute with David Francis is a Partner at Grant Thornton.
What’s keeping you busy at work?
I am preparing to give evidence in court as an expert witness later this month. Additionally, we are experiencing a more active and challenging approach by HMRC in relation to their assessing time limits and penalties regimes. Establishing taxpayer behaviours has been key in ensuring the law is applied fairly.
What do you know now that you wish you’d known at the start of your career?
Early in my career, I often viewed senior leaders as distant figures, almost superhuman in their capabilities and authority. However, as I progressed, I came to understand that they, too, are human beings with their own strengths, weaknesses and, more often than you’d think, imposter syndrome. Recognising this has allowed me to approach interactions with senior colleagues with greater confidence and empathy, fostering more genuine and productive relationships.
In retrospect, I wish I had started external coaching much earlier in my career. The catalyst for seeking coaching was a personal upheaval – a divorce – which forced me to reevaluate my life and work. However, the benefits of coaching have been profound. It has provided me with invaluable insights, strategies for overcoming challenges, and a supportive sounding board. External coaching has been instrumental in my growth, both personally and professionally, and I believe it can be a game-changer for anyone looking to enhance their leadership capabilities – I wouldn’t be where I am without it!
If you could make one change to tax...
I would bring uniformity to HMRC’s powers across the different taxes at a time where our tax system is already complex.
HMRC have different powers for different taxes. For instance, their authority to investigate or impose penalties varies. By standardising these powers, we would ensure all taxpayers are treated equally, making the system fairer and simpler. As an example, if you want to challenge an indirect tax decision, you usually have to pay the disputed tax upfront unless you can prove financial hardship. This system is unfair and, in my view, can restrict access to justice. It would be better if, rather than having to make a payment upfront, taxpayers instead provided security for the disputed amount or defer payment until the appeal was settled. This would make justice accessible to everyone, regardless of their financial situation.
Additionally, simplifying the appeal process would help taxpayers better navigate it, making the system fairer and more efficient.
Anything interesting in the Budget?
The rate of late payment interest, which now stands at 4% (up from 2.5%) above base rate is punitive and seems akin to a penalty. This is bound to cause more issues in the future whereby certain taxpayers could be pressurised in simply making concessions which were previously unwarranted for fear of paying late payment interest at a significant rate on alleged underdeclared tax.
Previously, taxpayers were able to buy a certificate of deposit and make a payment on account without the Officer leading the enquiry knowing. If the taxpayer emerged victorious, this would be repaid along with repayment interest which represented a much fairer level playing field.
Noticeably, however, the rate of repayment interest from HMRC has remained unchanged from the Budget. The government should remember that the desire to reduce the tax gap should not come at the expense of (innocent) taxpayers being penalised.
Has a recent tax case caught your eye?
Treasures of Brazil Ltd v HMRC [2024] UKFTT 929 (TC) is a useful reminder that in certain circumstances the FTT does have jurisdiction to consider matters of legitimate expectation, which has traditionally been within the remit of the High Court to hear public law arguments.
You might not know this about me but...
I have a rather large family of five children and my wife works for HMRC, which makes for an active household and sometimes adversarial dinner conversations involving tax policy.
