Clause 22
Saving Gateway Accounts Bill
9:15 am
Ian Pearson (Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Economic and Business), Department for Business, Enterprise & Regulatory Reform; Dudley South, Labour)
I have a great deal of sympathy with what the hon. Gentleman is trying to do. He wants the penalty charge to be payable within 30 days of its receipt, rather than its issue from HMRC, and he rightly points out that the notices could be delayed in transit. If a big freeze-up lasted for a considerable time and post could not get to account holders, HMRC would want to address that issue and, I expect, allow some flexibility. The key reason why the time limit runs from the date of issue is to provide certainty, because HMRC will know that date without needing to investigate further.
It would be a complete change from HMRC’s normal operating procedures to do what the hon. Gentleman suggests for saving gateway accounts. As he is aware, there is frequently debate about whether documents have been received, and creating potential for dispute between HMRC and people who have been issued with penalty charges about when notices were received and whether penalties have been paid within the permitted time period would add unwarranted complexity. We do not expect that penalties will be required on many occasions, and it is right to mirror current provisions, such as those on the issuing of notices in relation to child trust funds. Similar provisions on tax debts, which are charged under section 100(3) of the Taxes Management Act 1970, established the normal way of doing things. If the hon. Gentleman thinks about this at any great length, he will appreciate the difficulties of using the date of receipt, such as the lack of legal certainty that would be involved in any dispute between parties. I hope, therefore, that he will withdraw his amendment.