19. Mr A says he completed his 2019/2020 SATR using HMRC’s online tax portal and thought he had submitted it on 31 January 2021.
20. He says it only became clear something had gone wrong when HMRC contacted him on 15 April 2021 to tell him he was not eligible for SEISS grants four and five. This was because it had not yet received his 2019/2020 SATR.
21. Mr A says he checked his online account and found it was only 90% complete. He says the remaining 10% only required him to click the ‘submit’ button.
22. He says he clicked the submit button on 31 January 2021, but it did not work due to a ‘computer glitch’.
23. He tells us HMRC should accept his circumstances and allow access to SEISS grants four and five because of the problem he experienced in submitting his SATR.
24. He says the fact he paid his SA tax bill on 1 February 2021 supports that he thought he had already correctly submitted his SATR the month before.
25. Mr A says HMRC’s decision affected his finances and caused worry and distress.
26. We appreciate the hardship Mr A describes and understand having access to a financial support scheme like SEISS is important to him. But we can only look at whether HMRC considered his SEISS application in line with relevant guidance and standards and reasonably applied them.
HMRC’s initial SEISS decision
27. HMRC told Mr A it could not allow access to the fourth and fifth SEISS grants because it did not receive his 2019/2020 SATR until 15 April 2021.
28. It said to be eligible, an applicant must have submitted their 2019/2020 SATR by 2 March 2021. This is what it says in HMRC’s guidance ‘Check if you can claim a grant through the Self-Employment Income Support Scheme’.
29. HMRC tells us this deadline is an important anti-fraud measure to make sure it could tell genuine SATR amendments from those attempting to submit fake amendments to exploit the SEISS scheme.
30. We can see HMRC acted in line with guidance when it declined Mr A’s SEISS application.
Mr A’s appeal
31. HMRC acknowledged Mr A’s concerns around a ‘computer glitch’ that stopped him from submitting his 2019/2020 SATR on time and that he had paid his SA tax bill in February 2021.
32. But it did not agree Mr A’s circumstances were different or stopped him from being able to submit his SATR on time.
33. HMRC said if someone successfully submits their SATR through the online tax portal, they receive a 32-digit confirmation ID to their registered email address.
34. It said this code was only sent when Mr A revisited his online tax account on 15 April 2021 and submitted his 2019/2020 SATR.
35. HMRC says it was Mr A’s responsibility to manage his account and make sure he correctly filed his SATR on time.
36. It says the fact Mr A paid his SA tax bill in February 2021 does not show he had submitted his SATR.
37. We can see the AO agreed with HMRC’s decision and added to it.
38. It said Mr A had been self-employed for some time and had successfully applied for the first three SEISS grants.
39. It said it was reasonable to say he would have been aware of the SATR/SEISS submission process and the strict deadlines.
40. The AO could not see HMRC made a mistake. It did not think the ‘computer glitch’ Mr A described should have stopped him from submitting his SATR on time.
41. We cannot see any evidence that HMRC made a mistake.
42. While we sympathise with the problem Mr A experienced with his computer on 31 January 2021, we do not see this means HMRC was wrong to decline access to SEISS grants four and five.
43. Mr A would have received a 32-digit confirmation ID if his 2019/2020 SATR had submitted successfully. Because he did not receive this, it should have indicated something had gone wrong.
44. Had Mr A picked up on this and corrected it on or around the 31 January 2021, it is likely his SATR would have been received before the 2 March 2021 deadline.
45. In considering Mr A’s payment of his SA tax bill on 1 February 2021, we do not see this shows HMRC made a mistake.
46. Mr A may not have known his SATR had failed to submit the month before, but it was his responsibility to submit it before the deadline. Paying his SA tax bill does not change this.
47. HMRC has discretionary guidance for access to the SEISS scheme. But this guidance says it may only allow retrospective access to SEISS if there is evidence HMRC made an error, and it stopped a person from being able to access the scheme.
48. There is no evidence that suggests HMRC made a mistake.
49. We see no signs of maladministration (fault) in how HMRC considered Mr A’s circumstances when reviewing his eligibility to SEISS. It acted in line with its ‘Check if you can claim a grant through the Self-Employment Income Support Scheme’ guidance and our ‘Principles of Good Administration’, which say: ‘All public bodies must comply with the law and have regard for the rights of those concerned. They should act according to their statutory powers and duties and any other rules governing the service they provide. They should follow their own policy and procedural guidance, whether published or internal.’
50. We have decided to take no further action in Mr A’s complaint.
51. We understand our decision may be disappointing to Mr A. We hope our statement reassures him that we carefully considered all the evidence before reaching a decision.