HMRC bills workers for tax it abolished last year
Class 2 National Insurance (NI) contributions were effectively scrapped for self-employed people in April 2024. However, workers have reported that HMRC is still adding the levy of £179.40 to their tax bill despite now being exempt. Some have been told to pay twice this amount – £358.80.
Experts said it was 'ridiculous' that HMRC was getting self-employed NI calculations wrong when it was quick to fine workers for errors navigating the 'complex' tax system.
A source told The Telegraph there were indications the problem was 'very widespread'. HMRC said it was 'working urgently' to resolve the issue.
The reason for the error is unknown, but the problem is understood to have arisen as a result of the changes announced in the autumn 2023 Budget that came into effect for the 2024-25 tax year.
The rule change means self-employed workers now receive a credit for Class 2 NI, which boosts entitlement to 'contributory' benefits such as the state pension, as long as their profits are above £6,725.
As a result, they do not need to pay Class 2 NI, but can still use the credit to improve their entitlements.
Anyone with profits below £6,725 can opt to pay the tax voluntarily at a rate of £3.45 per week, adding up to £179.40 a year.
The Association of Taxation Technicians (ATT), a professional body for the tax compliance industry, said its members had reported receiving one of three letters containing errors from HMRC.
The first said the Class 2 NI tax sum had been 'amended' to zero, which made the letter unnecessary. The second wrongly demanded £179.40 in tax, while the third demanded twice this amount.
Michelle Denny-West, a tax partner with accountancy firm Moore Kingston Smith, said: 'The National Insurance Contribution (NIC) system for self-employed individuals has always been confusing, but the fact that HMRC cannot get this right is ridiculous.
'It's frustrating that taxpayers are expected to navigate such a complex tax system and can be charged penalties and interest for mistakes – yet they are now also expected to correct HMRC's mistakes.
'The risk here is that some individuals will unwittingly pay the additional NICs without realising it's a bill they should not be paying.'
Helen Thornley, of the ATT, said: 'Our members have reported a number of problems with national insurance calculations for 2024-25. Most self-employed individuals are not required to pay Class 2 contributions following changes announced at last year's Budget.
'However, many have received letters from HMRC which have added charges of almost £180 in Class 2, and in some instances double that amount.
'We have reported all examples to HMRC, who have assured us that this is being investigated 'as a matter of urgency'.
'However, it is still not clear what the reason behind the issue is. In the meantime, anyone affected should contact HMRC to ask for a resolution.'
An HMRC spokesman said: 'We apologise to those affected and we're working urgently to resolve this issue.'
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
India Suspends Duties on Raw Cotton Imports, Benefitting US Exporters
India will be suspending the 11 percent customs duty and agricultural cess on raw cotton imports in a move that is expected to grant some measure of relief to domestic textile and apparel manufacturers grappling with potential revenue loss from higher U.S. tariffs. The exemption, which will take effect from Aug. 19 to Sept. 30, can also be seen as a temporary concession to American exporters who have been pushing for greater market access to the South Asian nation, whose falling cotton yields have lately turned it from a net exporter to a net importer of the fiber. The United States is India's top supplier of cotton. More from Sourcing Journal India and China: US Tariffs Turn Rivals Toward Friendship in Major Geopolitical Shift No Hint of a Slowdown at Arc'teryx Parent Amer Sports Despite Tariff Impacts EU Tech Regulation Could Be Holding Up Final Trade Agreement With U.S. On Aug. 27, the Trump administration's already-high 25 percent tariff on India is poised to double, ostensibly in protest of the country's purchase of Russian oil. The Indian government was already working to address a previous White House complaint about a nearly $46 billion trade deficit by buying more energy and defense equipment from the United States. The escalated rate—and the existential threat it poses to Indian businesses that risk losing orders to rivals in more favorably tariffed geographies, such as Bangladesh and Vietnam—has further complicated matters. The United States has been India's largest overseas destination, accounting for nearly 29 percent of its textile and apparel exports, or nearly $10.3 billion worth, over the past year. Earlier this month, the Global Trade Research Initiative, a New Delhi-based think tank, said that an additional 50 percent duty could lead to a 40-50 percent decline in America-bound shipments. Rakesh Mehra, chairman of the Confederation of Indian Textile Industry, or CITI, has called the tariff a 'huge setback' to India's competitiveness. CITI has also been calling for the removal of the import duty on cotton to help domestic cotton prices be more in line with international ones. 'It is our fervent appeal to the government to urgently take steps to come to the aid of India's textile and apparel sector during these hugely testing times, given the government's strong commitment to increase the competitiveness of local industry and help our companies become major players on the world stage,' Mehra said in a statement. Mehra praised India's recent free trade agreement with the United Kingdom as a 'huge positive for India's textile and apparel domain,' one that could help the country achieve its goal of reaching $100 billion in textile and apparel exports by 2030. He said he hoped to see a similar deal manifest with the United States. 'A well-rounded [bilateral trade agreement] with the U.S., which takes proper care of India's sovereign interests and is also fair and balanced, could be a win-win proposition for both nations,' Mehra added. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
How unspent pension pots could rack up inheritance tax bills
Unspent pension pots could prove problematic for those calculating their potential inheritance tax bill, with new changes taking effect from April 2027. New calculations by Quilter show that a working-age single homeowner in England hoping to pass on an average-priced home (£290,395) and a pension pot of £415,000 would pass on an inheritance tax (IHT) bill of £82,158 from 2027 following changes announced in the government's budget — even if they die before reaching pension age. Until now, unspent pensions were typically passed on tax-free if the saver died before age 75, and especially if they passed away before they could access them. HMRC confirmed that from April 2027, pension savings will count towards a person's estate for IHT purposes regardless of age at death, unless covered by existing exemptions. This means that cohabiting families with young children, who do not benefit from the spousal exemption or a transferable nil-rate band, will be far more exposed, according to Quilter. 'Charging inheritance tax on a pension someone could not access and will never be able to use due to passing away before the minimum pension age is optically terrible for the government," said Jon Greer, head of retirement policy at Quilter. Read more: How to make pension pots tax-efficient "It is even more unjust for cohabiting families who have no spousal relief or ability to transfer tax allowances. A grieving family with young children and an average priced home could face six-figure IHT bills at the most distressing time." In many cohabiting households the property is jointly owned (joint tenants), meaning only half its value is included in the estate. Even then, a typical family in England would still face an IHT bill of £24,079, purely because of the pension inclusion. Where the property is solely owned by the deceased, the bill is more than three times higher. For example, in London, sole ownership of an average-priced home (£565,637) plus a £415,000 pension creates an IHT bill of £192,254 in 2027. If the home is jointly owned, that falls to £129,127 – still a severe hit for a grieving family without the protections available to married couples. Across Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, where lower house prices meant there was previously no liability for families with similar pensions, bills in joint-ownership cases will still be an average of £23,891, £21,392 and £20,007 respectively. These liabilities will grow if house prices inflate before the rules take effect, the research found.
Yahoo
8 hours ago
- Yahoo
How unspent pension pots could rack up inheritance tax bills
Unspent pension pots could prove problematic for those calculating their potential inheritance tax bill, with new changes taking effect from April 2027. New calculations by Quilter show that a working-age single homeowner in England hoping to pass on an average-priced home (£290,395) and a pension pot of £415,000 would pass on an inheritance tax (IHT) bill of £82,158 from 2027 following changes announced in the government's budget — even if they die before reaching pension age. Until now, unspent pensions were typically passed on tax-free if the saver died before age 75, and especially if they passed away before they could access them. HMRC confirmed that from April 2027, pension savings will count towards a person's estate for IHT purposes regardless of age at death, unless covered by existing exemptions. This means that cohabiting families with young children, who do not benefit from the spousal exemption or a transferable nil-rate band, will be far more exposed, according to Quilter. 'Charging inheritance tax on a pension someone could not access and will never be able to use due to passing away before the minimum pension age is optically terrible for the government," said Jon Greer, head of retirement policy at Quilter. Read more: How to make pension pots tax-efficient "It is even more unjust for cohabiting families who have no spousal relief or ability to transfer tax allowances. A grieving family with young children and an average priced home could face six-figure IHT bills at the most distressing time." In many cohabiting households the property is jointly owned (joint tenants), meaning only half its value is included in the estate. Even then, a typical family in England would still face an IHT bill of £24,079, purely because of the pension inclusion. Where the property is solely owned by the deceased, the bill is more than three times higher. For example, in London, sole ownership of an average-priced home (£565,637) plus a £415,000 pension creates an IHT bill of £192,254 in 2027. If the home is jointly owned, that falls to £129,127 – still a severe hit for a grieving family without the protections available to married couples. Across Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, where lower house prices meant there was previously no liability for families with similar pensions, bills in joint-ownership cases will still be an average of £23,891, £21,392 and £20,007 respectively. These liabilities will grow if house prices inflate before the rules take effect, the research in to access your portfolio
