TC09620 - [2025] UKFTT 01061 (TC)

As was recognised in Woodstream, the plain, natural meaning of the relevant wording in s 16(2A)(b) is that a decision has been made in relation to a person, where that person is the subject of the decision, in the sense, in this context, that it is that person’s statutory approval or registration (or other relevant status) that is subject to and affected by the decision. It does not apply to a person in relation to whom HMRC have not exercised any statutory right to make a decision but who is consequentially affected by the decision due to the nature of the decision made. I can see no relevant distinction between the circumstances of this case and those in Woodstream which would justify a different approach being taken in this case. The fact that HMRC may have power to make decisions made under the EWER in respect of a range of persons does not alter the nature of the particular decisions made in this case as set out above.

In my view, on its natural, plain meaning s 16(2A)(c) is intended similarly to capture “a person on whom” HMRC impose or apply conditions, limitations, restrictions, prohibitions or other requirements in exercise of their statutory powers to do so and not a different person who is consequentially affected by that imposition or application due to the nature of the conditions imposed. As HMRC put it, the conditions could not have been “imposed” or “applied” on Majestic, since it held no relevant approval or registration that those particular conditions could have been attached to.

It is plain from the covering letter and the nature of the conditions which HMRC have sought to impose that HMRC intended that Majestic would be affected as a consequence of the decisions they have made to impose conditions on CMBC in respect of the relevant approvals and registrations they hold. However, there is nothing in the wording of these provisions to suggest that the legislature intended to give the right to appeal against a relevant decision to a person other than the person in relation to whom HMRC exercise their statutory decision making powers and/or that these provisions are concerned with HMRC’s motivation and objective in making the relevant decision. On the contrary, that the interpretation set out above is correct is, in my view, reinforced by the fact that the legislature has not included in s 16(2A)(b) or (c) similar wording to that in s 16(2A)(a) to extend their ambit specifically to a person who “or is or will be affected” by the relevant decision or by the imposition of the relevant conditions, limitations, restrictions, prohibitions or other requirements.