HM Revenue and Customs

4. Mr Y tells us HMRC failed to update his tax account when he told it about a change in his circumstances in 2020, 2021, 2022 and 2023.

5. Mr Y said because of HMRC’s inaction he has now underpaid around £18,000 in tax and complains HMRC asked him to pay this back. He does not see this is fair because HMRC’s mistake caused the underpayment.

6. Mr Y tells us the tax underpayment put considerable financial pressure upon him and his family. He said the resulting upset and distress has been made worse because it was HMRC’s mistake which caused the underpayment.

7. He wants HMRC to look again at its decision not to write off the underpaid tax.

8. Mr Y told us between 2020 and 2023 he notified HMRC several times about a change in his employment, but HMRC failed to correctly update its tax records.

9. He complained to HMRC in late 2023 after receiving reminders for unpaid tax. He received an Adjudicator’s Office (AO) response on 30 May 2025.

10. The AO is the second tier of HMRC’s complaints process. Its role is to carry out an independent review of HMRC complaints. Once the AO has completed its investigation, this marks the end of HMRC’s local complaints process. The complainant can then escalate matters to our Office if they remain dissatisfied.

13. Mr Y said he told HMRC on several occasions between 2020 and 2023 that his employment circumstances had changed but HMRC did not amend his tax account accordingly. He said as a result, he has now accrued a significant tax underpayment.

14. HMRC said Mr Y called its helpline on 7 March 2024. It said Mr Y claimed he had called HMRC in 2020 to advise of a change in his employment and that he no longer claimed job expenses.

15. We understand the AO checked HMRC’s phone records during the complaints process and found no evidence of a call recording after 7 June 2020 (which is when HMRC informed Mr Y of his 2020-2021 tax code including job expenses of £15,000).

16. The AO said there are recordings of Mr Y calling HMRC on 4 and 5 June 2020. It said these calls recorded that Mr Y was going to submit his Self-Assessment Tax Return (SATR) because he wanted to claim expenses. This would appear to support why HMRC updated his 2020-2021 tax code on 7 June 2020.

17. HMRC (and the AO) said the first it heard from Mr Y concerning a change in his circumstances was on 15 September 2022. It said this letter notified HMRC that he no longer fulfilled the criteria to complete a SATR and asked for closure of his Self-Assessment (SA) record.

18. ESC A19 guidance is a provision which allows HMRC to write off tax where it failed to act on information provided by the taxpayer in a timely manner.

19. Our Principles say in their decision making, public bodies should have regard to the relevant guidance or legislation. Decision making should take account of all relevant considerations, ignore irrelevant ones and balance the evidence appropriately.

20. We will now consider Mr Y’s claim he notified HMRC of his change in circumstances between 2020 and 2023.

21. Mr Y said he first contacted HMRC in June 2020.

22. As we have set out above, there is no call recording evidence available to corroborate Mr Y’s claim. There is also no other evidence we have seen which supports it. We recognise there is evidence of two calls to HMRC on 4 and 5 June 2020 but they do not relate to a change in circumstances.

23. We are therefore unable to reach a view, even on balance of probabilities, that Mr Y notified HMRC in 2020 of his change in circumstances.

24. Mr Y next claims he wrote to HMRC on 20 January 2021. We have seen a copy of this letter in the evidence Mr Y supplied.

25. Even if we accept Mr Y sent this letter we cannot, even on balance of probabilities, say HMRC received it. HMRC and the AO have checked its records and cannot see it.

26. Alongside this, it was not, for example, sent by recorded delivery so there is no proof of post, post mark or receipt which could assist us. There is the possibility Mr Y’s letter may have been misplaced or lost in the post prior to reaching HMRC.

27. In the absence of other contact from Mr Y around this time to support it, we cannot robustly say HMRC received this letter.

28. For example, if Mr Y sent other verifiable letters which HMRC did not receive around this time it may demonstrate there was a pattern of HMRC failing to receive post. This may indicate an internal HMRC problem which was beyond Mr Y’s control.

29. We cannot see this was the case and therefore cannot reach a view that HMRC received Mr Y’s 20 January 2021 letter.

30. Mr Y next wrote to HMRC on 15 September 2022 and HMRC confirms it received this letter. Mr Y explained he no longer fulfilled the criteria to complete a SATR and asked HMRC to close his SA record.

31. We understand HMRC closed Mr Y’s SA record but later re-opened it. This led Mr Y to write again to HMRC on 12 June 2023 to remind it of his letter the previous year and that it should close his SA record.

32. HMRC subsequently closed Mr Y’s SA record again on 11 November 2023 and notified him of this closure a few days later.

33. We understand HMRC correctly closed Mr Y’s SA record on 15 September 2022 but did not remove his job expenses. This meant Mr Y’s record continued to show job expenses, and as a result, he reached the criteria to be brought back into SA. This is why HMRC reactivated his SA account following its closure in September 2022.

34. HMRC agreed it should have removed Mr Y’s job expenses when it closed his SA record in September 2022 but did not do so until November 2023. This is an indication of maladministration.

35. Because the sole outcome Mr Y is seeking is for HMRC to look again at its decision not to write off the underpaid tax, our statement will now focus upon whether HMRC’s consideration of ESC A19 is in line with applicable guidance and standards.

36. HMRC error alone is not enough to allow it to give up legally due tax. HMRC must consider the error under ESC A19 to see whether it can write off tax. To do so, all conditions under this rule must be met. Those conditions are: • HMRC has failed more than once to make proper use of the facts it had been given

• HMRC is satisfied it was reasonable for the taxpayer to believe their tax affairs were in order • HMRC must have failed to notify the customer about the underpayment of tax within 12 months of the end of the tax year in which the underpayment occurred.

37. The AO’s investigation decided ESC A19 could not apply because Mr Y’s circumstances did not meet all the qualifying conditions.

38. It said there was no evidence it failed to make use of information Mr Y provided in 2020 and 2021 which could have prevented the tax underpayment. It added HMRC also issued tax calculations within 12 months of the end of each tax year (2020 to 2021 and 2021 to 2022).

39. For this reason, the AO did not see HMRC could apply ESC A19 and therefore saw its position not to write off Mr Y’s underpaid tax, was correct.

40. The AO’s report noted the conditions are different for the 2022 to 2023 tax year because Mr Y informed HMRC of his change in circumstances in September 2022. It agrees HMRC did not then correctly amend his tax record until November 2023 (as we previously explained at paragraphs 33 and 34).

41. As such, the AO agrees Mr Y met the first criterion of ESC A19.

42. It said, however, for ESC A19 to be fully met, it would need to see HMRC notified Mr Y of the underpaid tax more than 12 months after the end of the 2022 to 2023 tax year.

43. The AO said HMRC issued a PA302 (simple assessment) tax calculation for the 2022 to 2023 tax year on 12 November 2023. It said this tax calculation, which would have made Mr Y aware of any outstanding tax, was issued less than 12 months from the end of the 2022 to 2023 tax year. The end of the 2022 to 2023 tax year was 5 April 2023, so HMRC had until 6 April 2024 to notify Mr Y of the underpaid tax.

44. For this reason, Mr Y did not meet all the criterion set out in ESC A19 so it could not be applied.

45. Having carefully reviewed both HMRC’s and the AO’s consideration, we are satisfied it is in line with ESC A19 guidance and our Principles. We have therefore decided to take no further action in Mr Y’s complaint.

46. We recognise our decision will likely come as a disappointment. We hope our statement clearly sets out how we reached our decision and has provided Mr Y with some more clarity in these matters.

47. We also acknowledge Mr Y is both upset and distressed as he has a tax underpayment he must pay back to HMRC and this has placed him under additional financial pressure.

48. We would encourage Mr Y to discuss matters directly with HMRC if he is experiencing any problems in paying this sum. HMRC may be able to agree a payment plan which could help to mitigate the financial burden.

1. We have carefully considered Mr Y’s complaint about HMRC. We appreciate this complaint is very important to him.

2. We cannot see any indication of maladministration in HMRC’s decision not to write off Mr Y’s underpaid tax. We have therefore decided to take no further action in his complaint.

3. We appreciate our decision will likely be disappointing, but we hope our decision statement clearly sets out our thinking.