Failures by a taxpayer's agent are generally treated as failures by the taxpayer for the purposes of whether there is a good reason for failing to bring an appeal in time. A recent case in which a taxpayer was refused permission to appeal more than three and a half years after the deadline demonstrates the importance of obtaining assistance with your tax affairs from a suitably qualified and appropriately regulated advisor.

After enquiring into the taxpayer's 2016/17 tax return, HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) had issued a closure notice disallowing deductions from his employment income in respect of sums he had paid to his wife. The taxpayer's agent appealed to HMRC, who upheld the closure notices. That decision was communicated in a letter of 17 March 2021, which stated that, if he did not want a review, the taxpayer could appeal to the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) within 30 days.

On 15 April 2021, the day before the deadline, the agent wrote to HMRC Solicitors' Office, asking the tribunal services to hear the case. He attempted to complete an online appeal form on 14 August 2023 and was told to make the appeal by post. On 26 July 2024 he wrote to HMRC asking for a copy of a conclusion letter sent in 2016, relating to enquiries into the taxpayer's earlier returns, in order to proceed with the appeal. Notice of appeal was finally received by the FTT on 11 November 2024.

The FTT observed that the delay was, by any assessment, serious and significant. The agent gave evidence that he had believed that the procedure for commencing an appeal was to write to HMRC Solicitors' Office, as he had done when appealing on behalf of a client some 20 years earlier. After hearing nothing further, he had assumed that the matter had been passed to the FTT. Having discovered that it had not, he had been unable to submit an appeal as he could not find the 2016 review conclusion letter. The taxpayer said that he had relied on the agent in good faith to deal with the appeal for him.

The FTT noted that, prior to the FTT's existence, the procedure had actually been to appeal to the inspector or officer who had issued the decision. The letter of 17 March 2021 had included details of sources of information on making appeals, and the FTT had existed for 12 years by the deadline. It was not reasonable for the agent to assume that the process remained the same almost two decades after he had previously appealed on behalf of a client. Having received no response, a reasonable person would not have waited over two years before taking further action.

The FTT found that the 2016 conclusion letter had not been requested before July 2024 and the lack of it could not therefore be an explanation for the delay following the attempt to appeal online. In any case, it was not reasonable to assume that what was required to bring the appeal was a letter that was not being challenged.

The taxpayer claimed that he had chased his agent, HMRC and the FTT on many occasions, but was unable to provide evidence of having done so before September 2024. Refusing permission to appeal, the FTT rejected his argument that his reliance on his agent provided him with a good reason for the delay.