13. Before we decide if we should investigate a complaint, we look at whether there are signs the organisation concerned has got something wrong. We do this by comparing what should have happened with what did happen.
14. In 2022, Mr O asked HMRC to amend a tax return he made for the 2015/16 financial year. HMRC replied and told him that he was outside of the four year time limit to do this. As a starting point, this was the appropriate advice in line with the manual.
15. Mr O then asked HMRC to waive its time limit given his individual circumstances. He believed an honest mistake had been made where he declared his income as dividends, but the company did not declare them as such in the relevant tax year. Mr O told HMRC he would essentially be paying tax twice after selling his share in the company in 2022.
16. HMRC considered the information Mr O provided and decided not to put the time limit to one side. It said that in line with its claims manual, it could not waive the time limit where (as well as other reasons) the reason for the amendment was substantially because of an oversight or negligence on the part of the person, their agent or adviser. The claims manual does state this so HMRC provided the appropriate information.
17. Mr O wanted to amend his tax return because he had ultimately made a mistake on it and declared income as dividends, when it was not. Therefore, it appears the reason for the amendment was because of an oversight on his part. And the guidance states HMRC cannot waive the time limit in these circumstances.
18. Therefore, HMRC has appropriately applied its guidance and considered the induvial circumstances of the case. This is what we would have expected HMRC to do. As such, we have decided not to take any further action. We appreciate that this is not the outcome Mr O wanted and recognise that the events did cause him distress.