Important dates
- PAYE and National Insurance payment to 5th November 2009 to be paid by 19 November 2009.
- CIS Construction Industry monthly return for June 2009 to be filed by 19 July 2009.
- Self Assessment Tax returns – Paper returns have to be submitted by 31 October 2009.
Once this deadline has passed your return HAS to be filed on line the deadline for which is 31 January 2010.
Changes
New Companies House Filing Penalties (Limited companies Only )
New Companies House Filing Dates for Accounts (Limited companies Only )
Companies House filing dates for private and public companies
Private companies:
New company accounts covering an accounting reference period (ARP) of more than 12 months must be filed no later than 21 months to the day of the date of incorporation.
Example:
- company incorporated on 14 April 2008
- accounting reference date (ARD) set at 30 April
- accounts cover ARP 14 April 2008 to 30 April 2009
- filing deadline 14 January 2010
Subsequent accounts must be filed no later than nine months to the day of the ARD.
For financial years that start before 6 April 2008 you must normally deliver annual accounts to Companies House within ten months of a company's accounting reference date for a private company. However, if a company's first accounts cover a period longer than 12 months, the maximum time allowed is 22 months from the date of incorporation or three months from the ARD, whichever is longer.
If the financial year has been shortened, the time allowed for filing the accounts is the longer of.
- nine months from the ARD (or ten months for financial years that start before 6 April 2008)
- three months from the date of the notice to change the ARD
If a filing deadline expires on a Sunday or Bank Holiday the law still requires accounts to be filed by the relevant date, irrespective of the day itself.
Companies House sends a reminder letter to your company's registered office approximately six weeks before annual accounts are due.
Public:
New HM Revenue & Customs Penalty Regime
HM Revenue & Customs’ (HMRC) new penalty regime for incorrect tax returns ‘goes live’ on 1 April 2009. Tax Returns submitted on or after this date (covering periods commencing on or after 1 April 2008) will be affected by the new rules. Taxpayers and their advisers need to understand the new rules now.
The new legislation arises out of HMRC’s ongoing overhaul of its powers and the way in which it carries out ‘compliance checks’. Its aim is to harmonise the different penalty powers for Income Tax, Corporation Tax, VAT, PAYE, NIC and the Construction Industry Scheme that previously existed. The new regime introduces a number of rule changes, which are summarised below.
The main focus and rationale underpinning the new regime is ‘taxpayer behaviour’. Taxpayers that take reasonable care in the preparation of their returns will not be penalised for mistakes, whereas those who do not, could well be punished more heavily than they are currently.
If a taxpayer submits an incorrect return, their ‘behaviour’ will be considered in one of four ways, which will then determine the range of potential penalty they may face. These are:
- a taxpayer who has taken reasonable care;
- a careless error;
- a deliberate error; or
- a deliberate error which has then been concealed.
Once the ‘behaviour’ has been established, the legislation sets maximum and minimum penalty loadings for each category. For example, if a taxpayer is found to have acted carelessly in submitting his/her return, the potential penalty will range from zero to 30% of the ‘tax lost’. However, if the taxpayer is found to have made a deliberate error, he/she could face a penalty of between 20% and 70% of the ‘tax lost’. If it can be shown that an error occurred, but that the taxpayer took reasonable care in the submission of the return, no penalty will be charged.
Under the current penalty regime, agents and taxpayers frequently find themselves disagreeing with HMRC over whether a taxpayer had been ‘negligent’ in submitting an incorrect return. These disputes are now likely to be replaced by debates over whether the taxpayer has taken ‘reasonable care’. HMRC has published illustrations about what it believes constitutes ‘reasonable care’, but these do not, of course, cover all eventualities and are open to interpretation. Expert specialist advice could still help reduce potential penalties.
Once the taxpayer’s behaviour has been categorised, the extent to which he/she disclosed an error to HMRC will then be considered. For example, a taxpayer may identify that an error has been made in the return which could be considered to be careless. If he/she then makes a full and unprompted disclosure to HMRC, assists in quantifying the liabilities due and allows HMRC access to the relevant records (if requested), then the penalty loading could be reduced to zero. Conversely, if a taxpayer making the same type of error denies anything is wrong, even when challenged by HMRC, and then fails to co-operate with HMRC, he/she could face a potential penalty of 30% of the ‘tax lost’.
One aspect of the new regime that must be remembered is the ability to have a penalty charge for a careless error suspended. If a taxpayer meets the conditions for suspension and, during the period of suspension, improves their systems and puts measures in place to prevent the error occurring in the future, they can avoid having to physically pay the penalty charged. Whilst there are various conditions that have to be met during the suspension period (including ensuring that tax returns are submitted and tax paid on time), this is likely to be a tempting option for taxpayers who might otherwise have to pay a large penalty.
The new regime also introduces powers to allow HMRC to potentially seek payment of a company penalty from a Director, provided that the error was deliberately caused by the Director and he/she then gained personally from it. In addition, HMRC will also be able to charge a penalty even though the business has made a loss (and would not, therefore, be paying any tax). How these new rules are implemented in practice will be watched with great interest.
Some people argue that the new penalty regime reduces flexibility and will result in less human consideration of the facts of a particular case. HMRC argues that the new system gives more certainty to all concerned and will result in more consistency. These points will continue to be debated as the new regime settles in, but it is clear that taxpayers and businesses will need to have systems in place to minimise the potential for errors to occur and, if an error is identified, they will need to consider making a full voluntary disclosure to HMRC at the earliest opportunity.