My colleague wishes to know whether there is any provision to accept an annual declaration late.

There seems to be some provision to accept it late by 31/01/06 if there are good reasons(suggested by CPAG book page 1401), but the IR have said this is for self employed people anyway. We can't find any regulation on this.

The client says that he did return the form within the original deadline but has no proof. He has a large overpayment caused by the non-return.

Any help hugely appreciated, if any knows of relevant regs, or has found a different way to deal with similar cases ?

Thanks

Victoria J.

I think the regs CPAG refer to on page 1401 are the TC (Claims and Notification) Regs 2002/2014.

The good cause point is Reg 11(3)(aa) of these Regs and was inserted by Reg 3(2)(a) 2004/762. http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/si/2004-0762.pdf is the link to these regs.

Hope this helps.

Victoria Todd

The helpful people at the helpline suggest that anyone can reply by the 31st January, as long as they have contacted HMRC by the end of September to tell them they don't have all the relevant details yet. I wouldn't take this as gospel, though...

Thanks to you both (sorry as soon as I go to post a reply I can't see your names)

We have looked at the legislation posted, but remain unenlightened as to the exact rules HMRC seem to be working under.

The client doesn't need an extension because he didn't have the necessary details, but because he says he returned a form in time (but has no evidence of this). A large overpayment has been generated because it was not received. My colleague thought this might be an easier route than trying to persuade HMRC that the really did return the form.

Victoria J

I know of cases where people who aren't self-employed have been given the extension to 31 Jan. Sadly they are also cases where the claims have then been closed down anyway ... creating an overpayment. I wonder if the extension is being applied consistently by IR staff?

Wouldn't it be better to argue that the client returned the reply form (with as much detail as possible) and suggest the IR prove that he didn't?