Final Minutes st Date of Meeting 21 March 2013 Group Name Ipswich LWT Chair: HMRC Lead Graham Jones Agent Lead Barry Whiffin Agent Representatives attending Robert Clubb B W Whiffin & Co CIOT Robert Clubb and Co ICPA Christopher Brown (CB) IFA Helen Brookson (HB) ATT Roly Pipe (RP) Roly Pipe & Partners CIOT Peter Finnigan (PF) David Cox (DC) Finnigans Fenn Cox & Partners ACCA AIA Chris Harman (CH) Lambert Chapman CIOT Sue Davies (SD) Avanti Tax Accountants ATT Vivien Ware HMRC attendees Apologies Graham Jones (GJ) Incoming HMRC Lead Helen Nock (HN) Anthony Allgood (AA) WT Co-ordinator Alternative Dispute Resolution Pam Rockall 1. Welcome & Introduction: GJ welcomed all to the meeting and round the table introductions were carried out. 2. Approval of Previous minutes: The previous minutes were approved with no amendments 3. Update on Action Points from the last meeting AP1 Emails received confirming agreement of the minutes AP2 GJ Provided the PO BOX address for compliance correspondence (circulated with final minutes) AP3 HN advised that all processed returns can be viewed by HMRC staff AP4 RTI Events have been provided as requested AP5 Feedback on DMB issues have been shared with the JISD team AP6 CH has still not received a reply to the email submitted via the HMRC website. HN to pursue Template 3 1 v1.0 AP7 Comments passed to email pilot team AP8 This will be rolled out under the Agent Strategy, current process will remain 4. Update on Resolved and Unresolved issues raised by the group at previous meetings The group currently have the following issues working with the NWTT WT042 Debt Management – Work has started with reciprocal visits between agent reps and HMRC. Visits have been made to HMRC and visits to Agent volunteers will start in February. HN will provide further updates as they become available. This is being review under the Joint Initiative on Service Delivery (JISD) WT050 P11d Expenses and S446 claims – New IT product is being developed to resolve this issue. There may be an opportunity for agents to participate in some end user testing. This will be held in London. HN will forward details when they are received. WT117 Identification of PAYE (Employer Output) NWTT has contacted the RTI business readiness team for an update. WT146 Inaccurate SA Autocoding - Guidance on auto coding has been published on the HMRC website http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/news/sa-auto-coding.htm 5. Update on all National Issues resolved since last meeting Details were provided prior to the meeting and there were no additional discussions required. 5. Key messages from HMRC Alternative Dispute Resolution AA gave an informative presentation on the Alternative Dispute Resolution process. He emphasized that collaboration runs throughout the process. The pilot is going to business as usual for SME from August 2013. AA explained how mediation works and explained that the mediator will neutral throughout the process and will not offer a solution but will try to get the parties talking together. The group discussed the Large and Complex and SME pilots and the current results from them. Copies of the slides will be sent with the minutes. GJ Thanked AA for his input Real Time Information. HN advised the attendees of the announcement recently published on the HMRC website about a concession for small employers (with less than 50 employees) who pay weekly but run their payrolls monthly. The concession allows them to file their FPS when the payroll is run until October 2013, after this date they must file FPS when or before the payment is made. 6. New Issues (AOB) including points raised at agents pre meeting 1. There is general concern that suggestions made in WT groups are given little serious thought at senior levels and seem to be dismissed with comments such as “inadequate resources” ”not needed” without any real explanation. This problem would seem to apply whether input is from either agents or local HMRC staff. Template 3 v1.0 2 Response - A full review of all Working cases has recently been carried out by the National Working Together Team details were circulated prior to the meeting 2. RTI. What provision is there for employers who are using the HMRC product but subsequently exceed the maximum employees requiring a transfer to commercial software? Response - A link to other free software is available on the HMRC website. If employers are unable to use Basic PAYE Tools they will need to try an alternative commercial package. Under RTI all submissions have to be made electronically. 3. If submission of RTI payroll input is rejected (for one employee) is it the case that HMRC believe wages should not be paid and does not this create a breech of contract with employees and a position possibly causing constructive dismissal in terms of employment law? Response - Here is a link to the items that must be completed on a FPS. The only mandatory data items for an employee areSurname/Family name Full forename/given name Date of Birth Gender DC felt there could still be legal implications if the FPS could not be submitted. AP1 HN to submit to RTI team for a response 4. Could HMRC request an amendment to Regulation (34) to allow on-line amendment of VAT returns? Response - This will need to be put through as a Working Together issues/suggestions template. AP2 HN to complete suggestion template 5. It would seem that AAM does not have authority to insist on action being taken but can only request this. Can this be changed to allow AAM authority to instruct and set deadlines for action/response? It is generally agreed that we currently receive excellent service but feel that our AAM should have actual authority rather than to have to continually request. Response – HN has passed on this comment to the AAM Issue Resolution Strand Manager for consideration 6. Instances of security questions have arisen regarding returns submitted with information not related to the taxpayer concerned. What information is actually needed to validate a return submission for acceptance? Response - HN asked for some clarification. This relates to SA returns submitted online. There have been instances where another customer’s information has been recorded under a client UTR which then causes problems when an attempt is made to file the correct return. AP3 HN to investigate and feedback 7. Why are repayments other than, generally, those generated from SA100 submission taking so long to be made? There is a feeling that restrictions are being made on total refunds to be made in any specified period. Response - There are no restrictions in place regarding the total number of refunds to be made in any specific period. Repayments a generally issued faster when an online return is submitted and this is one of the benefits of Template 3 v1.0 3 online filing. For other areas of HMRC’s business manual intervention is required and the volume of work on hand will impact on the time taken to process a repayment. 8. Appeals need to be made by formal letter but when this is mentioned (e.g. a penalty charge) there is no indication of the address to which this should be sent. Can this be rectified? Response - Appeals should be sent to the address the appealable decision was sent from. 9. HMRC “business coordinators” and indirect information gathering. It has come to attention that a public agency when placing contracts for services to corporate bodies is requiring, on pain of contract termination, that the service provider provides evidence that the provider is dealing with their tax position “correctly” in that it demands to be advised with evidence as how that service provider is considering the requirements of “IR35” and HMRC “business entity” tests. Contractors have been told that if the agency is not satisfied that the contractor is “low risk” the information provided will be sent to the HMRC business coordinator. It seems unlikely, given the agency has no tax responsibility with regard to a corporate provider that being a matter between HMRC and the provider, that an agency would decide to do this and the logic is that pressure is being brought to bear. Given that HMRC suggests the function of coordinators is simply assisting employers/taxpayers to ensure they are handling matters correctly does the situation not suggest that this function has been extended as a means of information gathering? Response - As you have said in your question the Customer Coordinator role is defined as this Customer Coordinators:      are a named point of contact with oversight of the issues for that business can direct the business towards appropriate specialists and published information follow up issues within HMRC to ensure they are concluded within an agreed timeframe maintain a single up to date overview of the customer, their issues and risks contact their businesses when necessary to make them aware of any significant HMRC development I have spoken to a Customer Coordinator who assures me that no direct request has been made of them to request information of this nature. HN asked if it was possible to have details of the agency requesting the information so that an approach can be made to the Customer Co-coordinator directly 10. I (a member of the agent group) have in the last couple of months come across three instances of what appear to be standard letters being sent to clients that have the impact of an officer's decision denying the right to deduct while not advising of the right to request reconsideration or appeal to a Tribunal. In one of these an agent had been appointed but was not informed; the client happened to be a hospital in-patient with breast cancer. When I learned of the position the matter was out of time for appeal. Each of these came from VAT processing centers. These were: · The voluntary disclosure unit regarding a refund claim for input tax that was not included in the returns. Template 3 v1.0 4 · The registration unit over a building where an option was in place. · The DIY self-build unit over a claim for a village hall. I consider this to be indicative of a worrying trend. Response – AP4 - Please supply the reference numbers for these examples so that I can see if there was any specific reason why the correspondence was sent to the customer directly and not to the agent 11. Proposed Closure of enquiry centres. This will impact on less articulate taxpayers as well as those who might need to discuss something in some depth. This seems to extend the attitude of not wanting anyone to visit HMRC offices. Also with regard to proposed home visits how is HMRC intending to convince the taxpayer that a “home visit”, based on HMRC’s decision as to whether it is appropriate, is actually to assist rather than anything else? (Sounds rather like traffic wardens saying they will be round to help you park your car easily and without penalty). Response - HN provided a statement about the closure of enquiry centers. HMRC is dedicated to providing help to customers who need it. This new service will enable us to tailor that help in a way that works better for customers and is more flexible and affordable than the service we currently provide. We will give a more specialized phone service for customers whose affairs can be resolved over the telephone and face –to-face help to those who need it, visiting them at a place convenient to them, saving them both travel and time. HMRC will provide a more modern and accessible service that will target the right support to customers who need it where and when they want it. DF asked if here was a link between Companies House and HMRC? He has experienced problems with the issue of penalties when a company has already been struck off. AP5 HN to investigate HB raised concerns about an email she had received from Santander about SA payment problems. The email was not very clearly worded, AP6 HB to pass copy to HN to review Summary of Action Points AP1 HN to submit to RTI team for a response – There is nothing in the guidance to say that payment cannot be made if it is not possible to submit the FPS, here is some guidance on correcting errors http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/payerti/reporting/errors.htm AP2 HN to complete suggestion template – Template is working as Suggestion SO93 and it has been submitted to the business area for review. AP3 HN to investigate and feedback – under review with business area. AP4 - Please supply the reference numbers for these examples so that I can see if there was any specific reason why the correspondence was sent to the customer directly and not to the agent AP5 HN to investigate - Please see this Companies House Booklet which advises that HMRC must be contacted AP6 HB to pass copy to HN to review – Copy received, this was a standard communication issued to all Working Together Agents to alert them to some problems HMRC was having with the Santander Bill Paying Service. Because of the payment deadline It was sent directly to all known WT agents (instead of via the Working Together Coordinators) so that they could warn/update their clients if necessary. rd Date of next meeting: Thursday 3 October, 10.00am, Podium Conference Room,St Clare House, Ipswich Template 3 v1.0 5 Template 3 v1.0 6