Issues raised by HMRC
Issues raised by HMRC
HMRC makes a further argument that it does not fall within the definition of “Minister of the Crown” and therefore childcare support under tax credits is not “other relevant childcare support” for the purposes of s.13 of the 2014 Act.
The claimant accepted that HMRC does not fall within the definition of “Minister of the Crown”, but he submitted that tax credits (including the childcare element) are still support “provided” by a Minister of the Crown, as the definition of that term includes the Treasury.
HMRC does of course administer the tax credits system; however the Treasury has ultimate responsibility for the design and policy decision-making of the system. That is exemplified by the fact that all substantive regulations for tax credits are made by the Treasury and not HMRC, see s.65(1) of the Tax Credits Act 2002 (“the TCA 2002”).
HMRC have also argued that “other relevant childcare support” referred to in s.13 of the 2014 Act does not include the childcare element of tax credits.
They assume that those TFC claimants who are in receipt of an ongoing award of tax credits are likely to be in receipt of the childcare element and as such s.30 of the 2014 Act would never bite if “other relevant childcare support” includes the childcare element of tax credits.
The claimant disagreed with that assumption. In fact, in all situations where it is beneficial for a claim to be made for TFC despite an ongoing entitlement to tax credits, there will not be entitlement to the childcare element of tax credits.
That is because it is only worthwhile to claim TFC (thereby ending entitlement to tax credits) where the tax credits entitlement is very low – below the potential support provided by TFC, which is a maximum of £2,000 per annum.
As per the Tax Credits (Income Thresholds and Determination of Rates) Regulations 2002 (“the TCR 2002”), the childcare element is tapered away before Child Tax Credit is reduced. The child element of Child Tax Credit is well in excess of £2,000.
This means that any TFC claimants with an overall tax credit entitlement of under £2,000 will not be receiving any childcare support through tax credits.
Even where a claim is made for TFC despite it not being worthwhile, there are still many situations where there is no entitlement to a childcare element. That could be because household income is high enough for the childcare element to be tapered to nil, or where a claimant does not currently make any use of childcare, but is claiming TFC for the coming term. (A TFC claim must be made prior to the start of the term.)
- Heading
- Section 1
- w as HMRC v RS (No.2) (TC) [2022] UKUT 246 correctly decided in its interpretation of Article 7(6) of the Welfare Reform Act 2012 (Commencement No.23 and Transitional and Transitory Provisions) Order
- SC946/21/00244 (on appeal UA-2023-001612-TC ) dated 9 December 2020 that he had made a valid declaration of eligibility for tax-free childcare and so his entitlement to tax credits was correctly termi
- SC946/19/02420 (on appeal UA-2023-001611-TC ) dated 9 August 2019 that he was not able to make a new claim for tax credits for any period after 19 March 2019
- The Tribunal’s Statement of Reasons
- The Statutory Framework
- The Claimant’s Submissions
- entitlement period and therefore terminated his tax credits award immediately prior to that date following that termination, HMRC issued various decision notices and other notices, which were subject to a previous appeal. The Upper Tribunal in UA-202
- the 2018/2019 tax year. The decision notice was issued to the claimant on 11 December 2020
- Ground 2: The alleged “declaration of eligibility” was not “valid”
- he was in fact an eligible person, because tax credits were not payable in respect of the relevant period
- Issues raised by HMRC
- Ground 3: S.30 of the 2014 Act no longer applies
- UA-2023-001611-TC
- in relation to Appeal SC946/21/00244 (“Appeal 1”): on 14 March 2019, the
- in relation to Appeal SC946/19/02420 (“Appeal 2”): he was not permitted to apply for tax credits in August 2019
- Factual Background
- The TFC Scheme
- Appeal 1
- The Legal Framework
- by s.5(1) the length of the “entitlement period” is 3 months, subject to any regulations altering that length
- the day on which the declaration was made was 14 March 2019. This was the claimant’s first application
- the “relevant day” was 20 March 2019
- The declaration question
- https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ukgwa/20190317223446/https:/www.gov.uk/tax-free-childcare which contained the portal which the claimant would have used to make his application
- ( https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ukgwa/20190321044737/https:/www.gov.uk/apply-30-hours-free-childcare )
- The validity question
- in this regard, the position is similar to that in HMRC v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and GS [2023] UKUT 9 (AAC) where the Upper Tribunal considered a regulation containing a requirement
- The “other relevant childcare support” question
- HMRC’s non-ministerial position is also clear from the Explanatory Notes to the 2005 Act
- if he is right, a recipient of the childcare element of WTC would necessarily
- The ceasing to have effect argument
- comity: should the Upper Tribunal follow RS (No.2) in the interests of comity?
- The Legal Framework
- RS (No.2)
- Comity
- The “for the next tax year” argument
- Discussion
- The validity question
- The “other relevant childcare support” argument
- The ceasing to have effect argument
- Appeal 2
- Conclusions
![[2025] UKUT 166 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png)