Conclusions
CONCLUSION
We have concluded that HMRC was correct to refuse repayment in each of the review decisions in issue in the present claims. To the (very limited) extent that we have identified an error in the reasoning in relation to the decision for Fluid Scotland, we are satisfied that it is highly likely that the same outcome would be reached if that error had not been made. Accordingly, the relief sought by the claimants is refused.
MRS JUSTICE BACON
JUDGE SWAMI RAGHAVAN
Release date: 15 August 2025
- Heading
- INTRODUCTION
- THE DRRS AND RELATED LEGISLATION
- Relevant provisions of the DRRS
- Recovery of income tax and NICs
- HMRC’S DECISIONS UNDER REVIEW
- Fluid Scotland
- Fluid London
- Airedale
- ISSUES
- POWER TO RECOVER
- The interpretation of DRRS §4.5.1
- HMRC’s alternative argument on the power to uplift income tax
- Power to recover NICs
- Application to the claims
- Fluid Scotland
- Fluid London
- Airedale
- REASONABLE DISCLOSURE
- The interpretation of s. 20(5) of the Finance Act 2020
- Source material for “reasonable disclosure requirement”
- The s. 20(5) conditions
- Fluid Scotland: disclosure made
- HMRC’s decision
- Application of the s. 20(5) conditions
- Airedale: disclosure made
- HMRC’s decision
- Application of the s. 20(5) conditions
- Conclusions
![[2025] UKUT 00278 (TCC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_ICfrj4g.png)