Millions of workers urged to check key code on document arriving in days
Millions of workers are being urged to keep an eye out for an important tax document. Your employer must issue your latest P60 by May 31, by post or electronically.
Your P60 summarises your total pay and deductions for the tax year. It also contains your final tax code, and it is important you check this is correct in case you owe money to HMRC.
Tax codes are made up of a series of numbers and letters and are assigned to you by HMRC based on the information it has on your income.
But there are a number of reasons why it could be wrong - for example, if you recently changed jobs or if HMRC has been given incorrect information from your employer.
Get money news and top deals straight to your phone by joining our Money WhatsApp group here. We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don't like our community, you can check out any time you like. If you're curious, you can read our Privacy Notice.
Or sign up to the Mirror's Money newsletter here for all the best advice and shopping deals straight to your inbox.
The code shows how much of your income is taken in tax, and everyone who is paid through PAYE has one. The most common code is 1257L for people who have one job or pension - although not everyone will be on this.
If you have a second job, you may have a BR, D0 or D1 tax code, or if you have no personal allowance, you may have an 0T tax code. If you are exempt from paying tax, your tax code would be NT.
Taxpayers in Wales will have a C tax code, and those who pay income tax in Scotland will have an S.
Sarah Coles, personal finance expert at Hargreaves Lansdown, said: "It isn't always easy to get to grips with your P60, but the thing to look for is the final tax code.
"If it's wrong, you could end up over-paying or under-paying your tax – either of which is a pain in the neck."
MoneySavingExpert.com has a free calculator that you can use to get a rough idea about whether your tax code is correct. If it looks like you've paid too much tax, then you can claim it back by contacting HMRC by calling 0300 200 3300, or through the HMRC app.
You can claim back up to four additional years. But even if you think you have been overpaying for longer than this, it doesn't hurt to still contact HMRC.
They may pay back further than four tax years under certain circumstances - for example, if it was their fault that you overpaid tax. For overpaid tax that doesn't relate to the current tax year, HMRC will send you a cheque in the post with your refund.
If it turns out you've not paid enough tax due to an incorrect tax code, then you will have to pay this back. Don't let this put you off - it is better to sort this out sooner rather than later to avoid being hit with a bigger bill.
You can try and get the tax written off if it was not your fault that you underpaid - but this is not a guarantee. You can do this by asking for an "Extra Statutory Concession" or an A19 from HMRC.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
25 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Families hit with higher inheritance tax bills after HMRC disputes property values
HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) hit 1,500 families with higher inheritance tax bills last year after disputing the value of their properties. The tax office challenged property valuations in 7,500 death duty cases last year, according to data revealed by The Telegraph in a Freedom of Information request. Under inheritance tax rules, when a person dies, the executor must declare the value of the estate to HMRC. But if that property later sells for a higher price, then the tax office may open an investigation to claw back unpaid inheritance tax. Of the 7,500 disputes, HMRC concluded that 1,500 families had underestimated the value of the property, which resulted in the tax office pursuing them for extra inheritance tax. Ian Dyall, of wealth manager Evelyn Partners, said: 'HMRC now has a significant amount of available data at its disposal. 'If that data points towards undervaluation of an asset, or even assets omitted from the inheritance tax submissions, then they are likely to investigate.' Mr Dyall said high-value properties in particular would be 'carefully scrutinised' by the tax office given the potential revenue at stake. To work out whether an executor has underestimated the price of the property, HMRC will refer to the Valuation Office Agency (VOA). This government agency was recently scrapped as part of a cost-cutting drive, and will be subsumed into HMRC by April 2026. In about half of cases last year, the VOA agreed with the valuations given by the taxpayer. But in over 3,500 cases, the VOA pushed ahead with an investigation. This three-month process typically involves a physical inspection of the property, as well as requests for further information from the taxpayer. Sean McCann, of the insurer NFU Mutual, said: 'The valuation office is instructed to consider any features that might make it attractive to a developer, such as a large garden or access to other land suitable for development.' In over 1,500 cases, the VOA decided the property value was higher than the taxpayer had said. Mr McCann said: 'Valuation of property is not an exact science. Negotiation will often occur where the executors have obtained a professional valuation which differs from HMRC's.' If they cannot come to an agreement about the value of the property, then the dispute can be escalated to the First-tier Tribunal Hearings. This comes amid a rise in inheritance tax investigations by HMRC. The tax office launched 3,961 investigations in the 12 months to April 2025, up 31pc on the previous tax year. By comparison, the number of property valuations referred to the VOA has fallen in recent years, from almost 16,000 in 2021-22. However, the proportion resulting in the VOA suggesting a higher property price has increased. For the best chance of defending an enquiry by HMRC, Mr Dyall recommended getting two independent valuations from qualified surveyors. Inheritance tax is charged at 40pc on the value of an estate worth more than £325,000. However, homeowners can claim an extra £175,000 if they leave their main home to their children, giving couples a £1m allowance. An HMRC spokesman said: 'The majority of people pay the correct amount of inheritance tax. In cases where it is suspected someone has not, investigations can be opened, including referrals to the Valuation Office Agency.'
Telegraph
13 hours ago
- Telegraph
Frankie Dettori shrugs off bankruptcy to eye Royal Ascot return aged 54
Frankie Dettori hinted at a shock Royal Ascot return as he made his most high-profile public appearance in the UK since filing for bankruptcy. The record-breaking Flat jockey, who has ridden more than 3,500 career winners, was in good spirits despite long-running battles with HM Revenue and Customs. Having filed for bankruptcy in March amid a tax avoidance dispute, Dettori admitted he was now pining after a return to the venue where he achieved immortality in racing. Dettori famously rode a ' Magnificent Seven ' of all winners on the card at Ascot in September 1996 at odds of more than 25,000-1. In 2023, he abandoned plans to retire, announcing he would continue his career in the United States. Now, speaking to ITV Racing as he watched the opening day's action, he admitted a return to UK racing could be a possibility. 'I still have the little devil in my ear saying 'one more time',' he said. Dettori filed for bankruptcy three months after losing a court bid to retain anonymity in a battle with HMRC. The 54-year-old had already left the UK riding ranks in 2023 to begin a new life in America. He told ITV Racing: 'I'm good, I flew here on Sunday after riding in Kentucky, it's my daughter's birthday, you know I love Royal Ascot.... When I was driving here I was thinking how I missed it so much. 'Never say never. At the moment I didn't think it was appropriate to do it but who knows in the future. It's nice to be here and it's amazing racing through the week. 'I've got a different vibe today as I'm usually stressed out thinking about the racing but I'm seeing it from the other side of the fence.' In December, papers were republished by the upper tribunal of the Royal Courts of Justice naming Dettori after his attempts to secure anonymity in his battle with HMRC were thrown out. The alleged tax avoidance scheme was originally devised by Paul Baxendale-Walker, who is described by Tax Policy Associates as 'probably the UK's most notorious tax avoidance scheme promoter'. Dettori joined a string of high-profile names to face huge backdated bills over investments in companies that HMRC accuses of being deliberately set up for sheltering clients from tax. The Italian has generated almost £160 million in career earnings and is placed in the top 50 highest-earning jockeys in the world.
Telegraph
13 hours ago
- Telegraph
HMRC seeks to extend contracts with company behind Post Office scandal
HMRC is seeking to extend two contracts with the beleaguered IT firm at the centre of the Post Office scandal. Fujitsu's faulty Horizon software led to the wrongful prosecution of more than 900 sub-postmasters by the Post Office between 1999 and 2015. However, the tax authority has sought ministerial approval to extend two highly lucrative contracts currently valued at more than £330 million with the Japanese firm, just weeks before the inquiry into the scandal is due to produce its first report. It comes more than a year after Fujitsu wrote to the Cabinet Office to say it would not bid for new government contracts during the inquiry unless it was asked. When approached by The Telegraph about the extensions, a Fujitsu spokesman said the firm continued to adhere to the restrictions it had put in place. Lord Arbuthnot, who campaigned for the Horizon victims as a Tory MP, called any extension of Fujitsu government contracts 'truly wrong'. Meanwhile a former sub-postmistress who was sent to prison while pregnant because of Fujitsu's faulty IT system, said extending such contracts was 'an insult to victims and the inquiry itself'. HMRC, which recently admitted to losing £49 million in a series of phishing attacks on taxpayers, has sought ministerial approval to extend two contracts – one for its data centre operations and project services and another for hosting more than a dozen applications on a virtual platform through a virtually managed environment (VME) support contract. These contracts were initially valued at £52 million and £168.8 million, respectively. However, in written evidence to the Treasury select committee, then chaired by Harriet Baldwin, HMRC went on to cite higher figures – £78 million for the data centre operations contract and £253 million for the VME Support Contract. It is not known the exact sum the taxman has proposed to pay to extend the two contracts, the first of which expired at the end of March. The second will come to an end this month. The Telegraph can reveal that HMRC officials have sought ministerial sign-off in order to finalise both deals. Lord Arbuthnot said: 'I think it is truly wrong. [Fujitsu] helped the Post Office prosecute sub-postmasters even though Fujitsu knew well of the flaws in the software on which the sub-postmasters were being prosecuted 'And they told everybody that they couldn't remotely change the sub-postmasters' accounts, even though they themselves were doing it and knew they were doing it. 'If that was an individual doing things like that they would be facing many years in prison, and for the Government to extend contracts to someone who really ought to be behind bars seems to me to be quite wrong. 'Fujitsu has also not yet paid a penny towards the redress that sub-postmasters are getting and they're trying to minimise the hundreds of millions of pounds that they really ought to be paying.' In January last year, Paul Patterson, the chief executive of Fujitsu's European arm, told MPs at a business and trade committee hearing that his firm had a 'moral obligation' to contribute to compensation for victims of the scandal. Seema Misra, who was eight weeks pregnant when sent to prison for theft and false accounting at her old branch in West Byfleet, Surrey, said: 'It's terrible, especially when the whole country knows this is a firm at the forefront of the scandal. 'The international company ruined people's lives and HMRC shouldn't be thinking about renewing the contacts at this point.' Mrs Misra, 50, who was awarded an OBE this year for services to justice, said: ' Fujitsu has a lot to answer for, and instead of holding them to account, they are just extending contracts. It's a real insult, not just to victims but to the inquiry itself, to do this before the chair has produced any part of his report.' A Government source said: 'We inherited these contracts from the previous government. Extending them would be for a limited time on strict terms whilst we remove Fujitsu from government systems securely. If the previous government had acted earlier, we would not be in this position. 'We must never forget the lives ruined by the Horizon scandal, and no amount of redress can take away that pain. But justice can and must be done. This government is determined to hold those responsible to account, and will continue to make rapid progress on compensation and redress. 'Since we took office we have more than quadrupled the amount of redress paid to the victims and in March the business secretary, Johnny Reynolds, met with Fujitsu to begin the process of talking to them about paying compensation.' A Fujitsu spokesman said: 'We continue to work with the UK Government to ensure we adhere to the voluntary restrictions we put in place regarding bidding for new contracts while the Post Office inquiry is ongoing.' Former postal affairs minister Kevin Hollinrake said: 'Fujitsu has already admitted corporate responsibility for this national scandal and the biggest miscarriage of justice in modern history. 'The least Labour could do is secure the interim payment that we pushed for whilst in office before pressing on with these multi-hundred million contracts. 'Anything less would be another betrayal of postmasters and the British taxpayer.'
