TC09599 - [2025] UKFTT 00918 (TC)

Mr Graham is an HMRC Officer in the Environmental Taxes team. We found him clear and straightforward. He explained the history of HMRC’s involvement prior to the issue of the Notice of Assessment.

Mr Graham had met Mrs Jones of JJCE in November 2018. She had told him that the landowner had asked JJCE Ltd to fill in the ponds, and that this had been done with soils. She referred to the U1 permit that the company had from the environment agency [that would allow up to 1000 tonnes of waste to be used for certain purposes]. Mr Graham had viewed waste transfer notes at the company and Mrs Jones had stated to him that the lorries used could only carry 15 tonnes rather than the 20 tonnes shown on the notes. Mrs Jones agreed to provide the transfer notes to HMRC but did not later do so.

The Environment Agency provided the transfer notes in due course and confirmed that the material deposited was not covered by the U1 exemption.

Mr Graham accepted that the lorries could carry a maximum of 15 tonnes. He used this, together with the waste transfer notes showing Bage Farm, to calculate the Landfill Tax due at £88.95 per tonne.

Mr Graham had also visited the farm with a colleague and taken photographs of the site and met the farmer. We were shown the photos (see consideration of photo evidence below). He confirmed that he had seen metal, plastic and larger piles of rubble on the site.

Mr Graham explained that he was aware of the complications in removing the waste due to the Crassula. He was aware of the ‘stop notice’ and accepted that the waste could not be removed.

He set out what HMRC had considered in this case. As this was one of the first cases where Landfill Tax was to be charged in relation to a disposal at an unauthorised site, the case had been considered by his wider team, the policy team, the governance board for his area and the Tax Assurance Commissioners which is chaired by the CEO of HMRC.

He explained that they had also considered whether the landowner should have been issued with a notice of assessment. HMRC had been told that the farmer was unaware of the waste disposal and that at the time of the disposals he had a broken leg and could not get to the site. Therefore HMRC considered that the landowner would not meet the ‘knowingly cause or permit the disposal to be made’ clause of the legislation.

HMRC also took into account the fact that the directors of the Appellant were unaware of the [new in 2018] provisions in relation to Landfill Tax in these circumstances, and therefore decided not to charge the Appellant a failure to notify penalty.

Mr Graham was questioned closely by Mr Thornton on his decision making process in relation to the assessment. He was asked whether, once he had decided that the Appellant met the criteria to be assessed on the tax, whether he had considered whether or not the Appellant should be assessed. Mr Graham replied ‘I decided the assessment should apply to the Appellant.’ He confirmed the fact that the Appellant was not able to remove the waste was always a consideration throughout the entire case, but that it was ‘not my authority to waive someone’s tax’.’ And ‘not in my power not to assess a tax that is liable’.