Deadline for 'urgent' HMRC tax code alert tonight
Thousands are being urged to scrutinise their payslips before a crucial deadline as an HMRC tax code error could leave you £3,500 out of pocket.
With the second "payment on account" to HMRC due at midnight TONIGHT, workers are being warned that they may be making payments that don't reflect their current earnings or financial situation.
Robert Jones, CEO of tax refund company Swift Refunds, said: "Many people assume they just have to pay what HMRC tells them, but that's not always the case."
This warning is particularly relevant for those whose income has fluctuated in the past 12 months.
Workers who have experienced a drop in income due to losing clients, changing jobs or taking a career break since their last tax return could be eligible to reduce their payment, reports Birmingham Live.
They might even be able to claim a refund, instead of paying the full July amount. Robert stated: "We've seen clients reclaim thousands because they were on the wrong tax code, had fluctuating income, or didn't realise they could reduce their payments.
"If you're self-employed or have multiple sources of income, it's worth speaking to a tax specialist, or at the very least, reviewing what you've been asked to pay this month."
"You're not doing anything wrong by making sure you're only paying what you owe," Robert added.
A tax refund is a reimbursement made to the taxpayer on any excess amount paid in taxes to the HMRC for that financial year.
If you've been forking out more tax than necessary on each pay packet, you could be due a hefty tax refund. Many UK taxpayers on the PAYE system are owed a tax refund without even realising it.
You can backdate your expense claims for the past four years. To kick off a tax refund claim you'll need the following details: Photo ID (driving licence and passport) or, if you only have one of these you can provide proof of address (bank statement, utility bill, or tax bill) or P60 or payslip for each tax year you wish to claim for.
Most workers, whether they're employed or self-employed may be due a tax refund for work-related items, expenses or because they've paid too much tax in the financial year.
HMRC aren't aware of everyone's personal circumstances, and it's up to the taxpayer to get in touch with HMRC to see if they're entitled to any tax relief.
Other reasons for a tax refund might include pension payments, redundancy payments, interest from a savings account, PPI, or UK income if you're living abroad.
All claims for tax refunds and rebates are reviewed on a case by case basis. Use our tax claim form and answer a few straightforward questions to see if you could be entitled to make a claim.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
5 hours ago
- Times
My adviser made a mistake. Why should I pay the £5k tax penalty?
For more than a decade my husband and I were clients of a financial advice firm called Addidi Wealth. During this time I was working for the civil service and would exceed my pension allowance (the annual amount that can be saved into a pension while still qualifying for tax relief) every year — leaving me with an income tax bill on the excess. I used the Scheme Pays system to settle the tax, which meant that money was deducted from my pension and paid to HM Revenue & Customs. Every year I would send a form to my financial adviser who would then arrange this with my pension company on my behalf. My problem started in 2020 after Addidi Wealth was bought by another financial advice firm called Progeny and our adviser left the business. After 14 months with our new adviser, my husband and I decided to seek advice from another company. Fast forward to last year when I had a bill from HMRC saying that I owed income tax of more than £19,000 and a late payment penalty of £4,160. HMRC explained that I had exceeded my pension allowance in 2019/20 and had not paid tax on the excess. I was shocked because this meant that Progeny had failed to carry out my Scheme Pays request all those years ago. Even more concerning was that Progeny had carried out two annual reviews since that event which were based on the erroneous assumption that the tax liability had been settled. Progeny said that in 2020 it had sent the Scheme Pays paperwork to MyCSP, the company which operates the civil service pension scheme, although it hasn't provided any evidence that MyCSP had carried out my request. I spoke to MyCSP which said it never received the paperwork from Progeny. I have since paid the tax owed and the £4,161 penalty. I have also paid my accountant an extra £750 for their time spent liaising with HMRC. I think Progeny's service fell short of reasonable expectations and that it should reimburse me for these costs, but it won't. It cannot be right that I am left out of pocket. I have spent many hours trying to resolve this and I can't begin to describe the stress this has and address supplied You had paid Progeny more than £10,000 in annual fees for a fully-advised service, so you rightly expected the company to have managed your request without you having to worry about a surprise tax bill later down the line. In 2020 the maximum amount you could pay into your pension and still get tax relief was £40,000 a year. The allowance increased to £60,000 in 2023, although this starts to reduce once you earn more than £200,000 a year. You can also carry forward any unused allowance from the past three years. When you exceed your pension allowance, you no longer qualify for tax relief which means you have to pay income tax on the excess. You can either pay this yourself from savings, or you can ask your pension company to pay it under the Scheme Pays system. To use Scheme Pays, you would ask your pension company to give you a quote outlining how much it would need to deduct from your pension. If you're happy with the quote, you sign a form to accept it and the pension company would then confirm that it has paid the tax. MyCSP said it had sent Progeny a quote for £19,183 back in October 2020 but Progeny never accepted it. Yet Progeny showed me an email it had sent to MyCSP in December of that year attaching a form that made it clear that it was accepting the quote. It had also sent a second chasing email in January 2021 but never heard back. Even though the emails were sent to the correct place, MyCSP said it didn't have a record of those messages. When I spoke to the Cabinet Office, which is responsible for the civil service pension scheme, it said: 'MyCSP makes every effort to get things right and we understand the member's distress.' It said you must raise a formal complaint before it would investigate further. This does not change the fact that MyCSP never sent an acknowledgment to confirm that it had carried out the request, so I didn't think Progeny had done enough to ensure it had been processed. Progeny had also been managing your finances for months afterwards, so this issue should have been brought to light a lot sooner. I urged Progeny to take another look at your complaint and it reviewed the situation and agreed to pay your late payment fee and extra accountancy costs. It also offered you £500 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused. Progeny said: 'Our usual processes ensure that instructions are carried out correctly and in a timely manner, so this was an isolated incident. We have acknowledged that in this instance it was Progeny's responsibility to confirm the form had been received and, as such, we would be happy to cover the costs. Through reimbursing the cost we intend to put our former client back in the financial position she would otherwise have been in before the matter occurred.' But you weren't totally satisfied because you said the financial advice you had been given since 2020 had been based on inaccurate information. You said: 'I have shared my old statements with my new adviser, but I now believe these documents were based on incorrect information, meaning the value of my pension will be wrong as well as my retirement projections.' • HMRC made a mistake — but won't give us our £15k back You wanted Progeny to reimburse the financial advice fees that you had paid since this happened. But the company said you had got advice 'in all areas' and that it delivered all its ongoing services, so it refused. You were disappointed and debated taking your complaint to the ombudsman, but Progeny said it would retract its offer if you went down that route and would abide by the ombudsman's decision. In the end you accepted Progeny's offer in a bid to put this sorry saga behind you. You said: 'I still maintain that Progeny failed to show me any duty of care. I just hope that others don't have a similar experience.' I live alone in a three-bedroom flat, which is up for sale because I can no longer afford to live here. As there was a large landslip that affected the Isle of Wight, I am struggling to find a buyer. My only income is from a pension that pays me £600 a month, but this year my water bill almost doubled from about £24 to £41 a month, which I simply cannot afford. I can't understand why my charges are so high, especially when my water use is minimal (I spend a lot of time caring for my mother who lives nearby). Southern Water said that I don't qualify for a discount because I have a pot of savings. This isn't technically correct because the money in my account is from a loan I have taken out to pay for essential roof repairs. I am paying an extortionate rate of interest on this loan which is secured against my property. Southern Water says I must use the loan to pay my water bill, but this would leave me with a shortfall for the roof works and I would be in breach of my lease if I failed to pay. I have pointed this out to Southern Water but it won't listen. My financial situation is extremely tight. Like so many others, I am struggling to pay my bills but this increase has tipped me over the edge. Name and address supplied You are clearly struggling to keep your head above water and so it seemed unnecessarily harsh of Southern Water not to take your specific circumstances into account. Water bills are set to rise 26 per cent on average this year, so your 71 per cent increase seemed totally out of proportion. I suspect this is partly because your water bills are estimated: your property doesn't have a water meter because you have a shared supply with two neighbours. This seemed unfair, compounded by Southern Water refusing to put you on one of its special tariffs. It gives customers a 45 per cent discount on their bills if their household income doesn't exceed £22,020 a year and they have savings of less than £16,000. Your £7,200 income was well below £22,020, but your loan put you above the savings threshold. • I've been lumbered with my landlord's water bill Southern Water told me that once the repair works have been carried out and the loan has been used up, you could get the discount. But it would be another three months before the roof repairs were due to start and you said you would really struggle to meet your bills in the meantime. I asked Southern Water if it would at least give you some breathing space until you had paid for the repairs and it then agreed to give you a 45 per cent discount on your bills, saving you £220 over a year. Southern Water said: 'We are sorry to hear of the impact this experience has had on this customer. We are increasing our package of financial support, which will see us add a further 18,000 eligible customers to our minimum 45 per cent discount scheme.' It also said it could look at installing a water meter so that your bills were based on your actual use. You said: 'I cried tears of relief once I knew the payments were within an amount I could afford, and I am certain this would not have happened without your help. Let's hope my property sells soon.' • £1,521,968 — the amount Your Money Matters has saved readers so far this year If you have a money problem you would like Katherine Denham to investigate email yourmoneymatters@ Please include a phone number
Scottish Sun
15 hours ago
- Scottish Sun
HMRC sacks dozens of staff for snooping on taxpayers and accessing their records without permission
One employee was sacked in 2023 having sent the data of 100 people to his personal email address AX RUMBLE HMRC sacks dozens of staff for snooping on taxpayers and accessing their records without permission Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) HM Revenue and Customs has sacked dozens of workers after they spied on taxpayers and accessed their records without permission. Fifty workers were let go last year for breaking data privacy rules. Sign up for Scottish Sun newsletter Sign up 2 The HMRC says it takes the issue of data security 'extremely seriously' Credit: Getty Since 2022, a total of 354 employees have been disciplined for data security breaches, with 186 having been fired. The tax office has admitted that some of those that were dismissed were found to have looked up taxpayers' confidential information. HMRC holds a huge amount of personal data about taxpayers, including address, salaries and National Insurance numbers. Staff are banned from looking up sensitive information unless they have a genuine business reason. Despite that, a number of employees have been caught accessing personal details using HMRC's IT system. Figures for 2024-25 indicate 96 staff were disciplined for data security breaches, with 50 of those later being dismissed. The information was revealed to The Telegraph following a Freedom of Information request. According to HMRC, that represents less than 0.1 percent of its almost 68,000 employees. The figure is down from the previous year when 138 employees were disciplined and 68 were let go. Those figures cover all data security breaches and not just employees searching for taxpayers' details. HMRC using AI to scan social media for tax evasion investigations These include things like making changes to records without authorisation, losing sensitive documents or not securely disposing of inadequately protected devices. One employee was sacked in 2023 having sent the data of 100 people to his personal email address. The employee was visiting a business as part of a compliance check and he emailed himself a PDF file which contained a list of staff members' details, which included their salaries and National Insurance numbers. The file was later printed off for the meeting using his home computer, according to court documents. The analytics team, which is responsible for highlighting data breaches, then flagged the incident to his line manager and the employee was dismissed for gross misconduct after an investigation was launched. The case was taken to an employment tribunal with the former employee claiming he had not been thinking clearly at the time due to anxiety. The tribunal though threw out his claim for wrongful dismissal. A HMRC manager who was cited in the tribunal claimed data breaches had been on the rise since the pandemic due to remote working. The line manager of the claimant wrote an email to staff reminding them never to send personal data outside the tax office's systems. It said: 'There have been more incidents of this recently as we are working from home a lot more since Covid, but never send anything to your own private email address to print off that contains any personal or business data.' Former HMRC inspectors said the importance of data security was drilled into employees from their very first day. Ronnie Pannu, from the advice firm Pannu Tanu told the paper: 'When I was in HMRC, there was always a strong message from above that viewing a taxpayer's records where this was not necessary for a particular purpose was a serious issue which could have serious consequences for the individual concerned.' John Hood, from the accountancy firm Moore Kingston Smith said: 'Any HMRC employee foolish enough to look up personal information that is not part of their usual responsibilities faces a ticking time bomb as most searches are tracked. 'As an additional security, some parts of the system are restricted so that only specifically authorised personnel can access them, such as the departments dealing with MPs and civil servants'. All HMRC employees are given mandatory data security training and the government body limits access so workers can only look up customer record if it necessary for their specific role. The tax office also tracks activity on its systems in order to deter record breaches and deter misuse. Any employee who breaks the rules is investigated and faces having penalties imposed on them but each incident is dealt with on a case-by-case basis. Ellen Milner, from the Chartered Institute of Taxation added that taxpayers must be able to trust that the private information they supply will not be leaked or supplied to criminals. Any serious data breach must be reported to the Information Commissioner's Office. There were six cases last year of employees changing customer records without permission. Another two staff lost inadequately protected devices, according to the HMRC's annual report. The HMRC is currently under mounting pressure to strengthen its data security as online criminal attacks become more sophisticated and it moves towards being a digital-first organisation. In the past year some 100,000 taxpayers had been affected by phishing attacks. Criminals used stolen credentials to access their accounts and claim rebates. There was no financial loss to any individual and a number of arrests have been made. It cost the taxpayer £47million though. A spokesperson for HMRC said: 'Instances of improper access are extremely rare, and we take firm action when it does happen, helping prevent a recurrence. 'We take the security of customers' data extremely seriously and we have robust systems to ensure staff only access records when there is a legitimate business need.' It comes after the HMRC revealed it uses AI to spy on workers' social media posts as part of a tax crackdown. The tax authority has been using the technology to look at internet posts that might provide evidence of cheating tax bills, An HMRC spokesperson has insisted the tools are only being used for social media monitoring in criminal investigations and it won't affect the average taxpayer. They said there are "robust safeguards in place" and it's believed that social media monitoring has been used for a number of years. But concerns have been raised about whether the technology could be used more widely in future. HMRC also looks at workers's financial records, spending habits and tax returns to look for evidence of cheating.
The Sun
15 hours ago
- The Sun
HMRC sacks dozens of staff for snooping on taxpayers and accessing their records without permission
HM Revenue and Customs has sacked dozens of workers after they spied on taxpayers and accessed their records without permission. Fifty workers were let go last year for breaking data privacy rules. Since 2022, a total of 354 employees have been disciplined for data security breaches, with 186 having been fired. The tax office has admitted that some of those that were dismissed were found to have looked up taxpayers' confidential information. HMRC holds a huge amount of personal data about taxpayers, including address, salaries and National Insurance numbers. Staff are banned from looking up sensitive information unless they have a genuine business reason. Despite that, a number of employees have been caught accessing personal details using HMRC's IT system. Figures for 2024-25 indicate 96 staff were disciplined for data security breaches, with 50 of those later being dismissed. The information was revealed to The Telegraph following a Freedom of Information request. According to HMRC, that represents less than 0.1 percent of its almost 68,000 employees. The figure is down from the previous year when 138 employees were disciplined and 68 were let go. Those figures cover all data security breaches and not just employees searching for taxpayers' details. HMRC using AI to scan social media for tax evasion investigations These include things like making changes to records without authorisation, losing sensitive documents or not securely disposing of inadequately protected devices. One employee was sacked in 2023 having sent the data of 100 people to his personal email address. The employee was visiting a business as part of a compliance check and he emailed himself a PDF file which contained a list of staff members' details, which included their salaries and National Insurance numbers. The file was later printed off for the meeting using his home computer, according to court documents. The analytics team, which is responsible for highlighting data breaches, then flagged the incident to his line manager and the employee was dismissed for gross misconduct after an investigation was launched. The case was taken to an employment tribunal with the former employee claiming he had not been thinking clearly at the time due to anxiety. The tribunal though threw out his claim for wrongful dismissal. A HMRC manager who was cited in the tribunal claimed data breaches had been on the rise since the pandemic due to remote working. The line manager of the claimant wrote an email to staff reminding them never to send personal data outside the tax office's systems. It said: 'There have been more incidents of this recently as we are working from home a lot more since Covid, but never send anything to your own private email address to print off that contains any personal or business data.' Former HMRC inspectors said the importance of data security was drilled into employees from their very first day. Ronnie Pannu, from the advice firm Pannu Tanu told the paper: 'When I was in HMRC, there was always a strong message from above that viewing a taxpayer's records where this was not necessary for a particular purpose was a serious issue which could have serious consequences for the individual concerned.' John Hood, from the accountancy firm Moore Kingston Smith said: 'Any HMRC employee foolish enough to look up personal information that is not part of their usual responsibilities faces a ticking time bomb as most searches are tracked. 'As an additional security, some parts of the system are restricted so that only specifically authorised personnel can access them, such as the departments dealing with MPs and civil servants'. All HMRC employees are given mandatory data security training and the government body limits access so workers can only look up customer record if it necessary for their specific role. The tax office also tracks activity on its systems in order to deter record breaches and deter misuse. Any employee who breaks the rules is investigated and faces having penalties imposed on them but each incident is dealt with on a case-by-case basis. Ellen Milner, from the Chartered Institute of Taxation added that taxpayers must be able to trust that the private information they supply will not be leaked or supplied to criminals. Any serious data breach must be reported to the Information Commissioner's Office. There were six cases last year of employees changing customer records without permission. Another two staff lost inadequately protected devices, according to the HMRC's annual report. The HMRC is currently under mounting pressure to strengthen its data security as online criminal attacks become more sophisticated and it moves towards being a digital-first organisation. In the past year some 100,000 taxpayers had been affected by phishing attacks. Criminals used stolen credentials to access their accounts and claim rebates. There was no financial loss to any individual and a number of arrests have been made. It cost the taxpayer £47million though. A spokesperson for HMRC said: 'Instances of improper access are extremely rare, and we take firm action when it does happen, helping prevent a recurrence. 'We take the security of customers' data extremely seriously and we have robust systems to ensure staff only access records when there is a legitimate business need.' It comes after the HMRC revealed it uses AI to spy on workers' social media posts as part of a tax crackdown. The tax authority has been using the technology to look at internet posts that might provide evidence of cheating tax bills, An HMRC spokesperson has insisted the tools are only being used for social media monitoring in criminal investigations and it won't affect the average taxpayer. They said there are "robust safeguards in place" and it's believed that social media monitoring has been used for a number of years. But concerns have been raised about whether the technology could be used more widely in future. HMRC also looks at workers's financial records, spending habits and tax returns to look for evidence of cheating. 2
