Tax Credits: Upper Tribunal decisions (by topic)
You can use the list below to view cases under each topic. In many instances, the cases cover more than one topic therefore some cases will appear in more than one topic group.
- Children/childcare
- Couples / undeclared partner
- Immigration & Residency
- Income
- Work
- Backdating
- Disability
- Tax credit elements
- Claims and processes
- Notifications
- Appeals
- Official error
- Aspects of decision making (e.g. evidence, burden of proof)
- CSTC/174/2019 - Held that the First-tier Tribunal’s decision that the person who was the contact point for the children’s school, GP and dentist was ultimately determinative as the person who had the main responsibility was an error of law for the reasons in paragraph 8. The Judge directed the new tribunal to follow the approach set out by Judge Jacobs in paragraph 38 of PG v Commissioners of HMRC and NG (TC) [2016] UKUT 216 (AAC)
- CTC/1937/2018 - Case one of some 40 linked appeals where the identities of the appellants' employers and childcare providers were similar and/or identical. Cases heard in tranches - HMRC argued that neither employment nor childcare provider was genuine - First-tier Tribunal's credibility findings and appellate review
- CTC/1443/2018 - Whether a school has to be registered or approved in order for a person to be a qualifying young person
- CTC/3547/2016 - Child tax credit - competing claims by separated parents for same period - Rule 2.2 of regulation 3 of the Child Tax Credit Regulations 2002 and the main responsibility test - question must be decided on appeal by FTT - whether FTT decision should be set aside
- CTC/3532/2016 - Overpayment of the childcare element paid in respect of childcare costs recoverable where childminder no longer registered with OFSTED
- CTC/610/2016 - Child care costs. Failure by HMRC to produce all relevant evidence on appeal.
- CTC/1841/2015 - Whether claimant's children were in receipt of relevant childcare / relationship between sections 16 and 18 of the Tax Credits Act 2002
- CTC/611/2015 - Meaning of ‘main responsibility’ in rule 2.2(b) of regulation 3 of the Child Tax Credit Regulations 2002
- C1/14-15(TC)(T) - The case concerns a claimant who lived in Northern Ireland and worked in the Republic of Ireland and used a childcare provider based in the Republic of Ireland. Initially, HMRC accepted her childcare costs but then later revised the decision and excluded them on the grounds they weren’t qualifying childcare costs because the provider wasn’t duly registered under the terms of the tax credit rules. Decision by the Northern Ireland Social Security Commissioner concludes that although a childcare provider is located outside the UK and does not fall within the defined categories in the tax credit regulations it can still be qualifying childcare for tax credit purposes.
- CTC/4184/2014 - Whether child tax credit ‘decisions’ should be set aside for lack of coherence and connection to legal powers
- CTC/4192/2014 - Tribunal's failure to consider whether claimant's daughter's apprenticeship constituted 'Foundation Learning'
- CTC/548/2013 - Decision concerned with the ‘normally living with’ test in the context of establishing responsibility for a child/young person - [2013] UKUT 561 (AAC) (word copy)
- CTC/2363/2012 - Decision relating to the date on which entitlement to the childcare element ceases in relation to the WTC 4-week run on - [2013] UKUT 484 (AAC) (word copy)
- CTC/2107/2010 - Whether couple where wife lived in Spain with children were entitled to child tax credit - [2011] UKUT 467 (AAC) (word copy)
- CTC/2520/2010 - Whether child tax credit exportable within EU where claimant in receipt of state retirement pension - [2010] UKUT 322 (AAC) (word copy)
- CTC/720/2010 - Disability element / whether telephone claim for disability living allowance adequate notification for tax credit purposes - [2010] UKUT 483 (AAC) (word copy)
- CSTC/299/2010 - Responsible for child and child care credits / proper application of 'main responsibility' test - [2010] UKUT 400 (AAC) (pdf copy)
- CTC/3179/2009 - Whether child tax credit payable to person living in EC country / whether CTC/1853/2009 correctly decided - [2010] UKUT 323 (AAC) (pdf copy)
- CTC/1853/2009 - Child tax credit / entitlement whilst resident elsewhere in the European Economic Area - [2010] UKUT 49 (AAC) (pdf copy) | LITRG Summary
- CTC/1518/2009 — Whether educational establishment outside UK counts when linking periods of full time education - [2010] UKUT 288 (AAC) (pdf copy)
- CTC/3692/2008 - Calculation of backdated awards of child tax credit for a refugee - [2009] UKUT 73 (AAC) (pdf copy)
- CTC/2608/2008 - Refusal of child tax credit to substantial minority carer / whether discrimination can be justified - [2009] UKUT 24 (AAC) (pdf copy)
- CSTC/475/2008 - Relevance of day time / term time responsibility (pdf copy)
- CTC/4390/2004 - Procedures to be applied where there are competing claims for child tax credit (pdf copy)
- CTC/2349/2018 - Tax credits - Claim by married woman as a single person - Whether separated in circumstances such that separation likely to be permanent (TCA 2002 s.3(5A)(a)) - FTT direction addressed to claimant that husband attend as a witness - Adverse inference drawn when husband failed to attend - Importance of assessing evidence in its cultural context - Attitudes towards separation and divorce within a Muslim community where married couple also first cousins
- CTC/2892/2017 - Whether claimant entitled to tax credits as single person - whether claimant "living together as husband and wife" - consideration of the "signposts" and parties' intentions, and how those intentions may change over time
- CTC/3207/2016 - Nature and assessment of permanence of separation for the purposes of section 5(5A)(a)(ii) of the Tax Credits Act 2002.
- CTC/919/2015 - The case involves a single claim. HMRC’s assertion that the claimant was part of a couple fails to take account of evidence provided by the claimant who was ‘badly let down’ by HMRC’s decision-making. Claimant’s appeal is allowed
- CTC/455/2015 - Tribunal made cohabitation decision on basis of insufficient evidence, failed to consider appropriateness and amount of penalty and failed to consider whether special steps needed to obtain claimant's evidence
- CTC/160/2015 - This case determined that the burden of proof is on HMRC when terminating a tax credits award and that shared responsibility for children should not be presumed in absence of evidence to the contrary
- CTC/99/2015 - The case is about a single claim and HMRC argue that the claimant was part of a couple. The decision discusses plausibility and whether it was right for HMRC to apply a judgement argued in terms of the actions of an arbitrary ‘reasonable person’ or the facts of the case surrounding the individual in question
- CTC/5672/2014 - The case concerns an enquiry under section 19, making a decision which was altering a final decision under section 18. In those circumstances it is argued, it was for HMRC to demonstrate that that final decision under section 18 had been the wrong one. HMRC produced no evidence to that effect to the F-tT and on the arguments supplied it was found that the appellant was separated and had no more than a hope of reconciliation with their spouse at the time of the claim and the single claim was correct
- CTC/5600/2014 - This case determined that the onus of proof is on HMRC to establish that a claimant is not entitled to tax credits as a single person because she is a member of a couple
- CTC/1824/2014 - This decision is concerned with an undeclared partner case. It highlights the importance of the onus of truth being squarely with HMRC when considering making decisions under s16 TCA and explores the steps that are required in some depth. ‘However, given the onus of proof rests squarely on HMRC under section 16, in my judgment the correct starting point was that it was for HMRC to make good the evidential basis for the “reasonable grounds for believing” statutory test it was seeking to rely on. Conversely, the starting point was not for the appellant to show that the award had been properly made (i.e. that she was a single claimant).’The case also exposes other weaknesses in HMRC decision-making and is critical of the quality of the appeal submission
- CTC/1055/2014 - Tribunal is not entitled to draw adverse inference about failure to provide evidence where claimant not given adequate explanation of what would be appropriate evidence. Case involves a single claim which HMRC assert should have been a joint claim, but HMRC failed to supply evidence of the facts they asserted and claimant was not given adequate indication of what evidence she could provide which would be appropriate in her case. Decision also critical of quality of HMRC’s submission
- CTC/1487/2013 - This decision discusses whether a married couple can be regarded as separated in circumstances likely to become permanent where they remain living in the same home and whether members of a separated married couple are obliged to live in separate households - [2013] UKUT 631 (AAC)
- CTC/2630/2011 - Whether a couple who were divorcing were members of the same 'household' - [2012] UKUT 230 (AAC) (word copy)
- CTC/2107/2010 - Whether couple where wife lived in Spain with children were entitled to child tax credit - [2011] UKUT 467 (AAC) (word copy)
- CSTC/724/2006 - R(TC) 1/07 - Whether single person and couple claims are mutually exclusive (pdf copy)
- CSTC/76/2006 - Joint claims and qualifying conditions for entitlement to a disability element (pdf copy)
- CTC/1630/2005 - R(TC) 2/06 - Claiming as a single person when separated from partner (pdf copy)
- CTC/3864/2004 - Whether claimant living together with another as man and wife and therefore joint claim required (pdf copy)
- GL v His Majesty's Revenue & Customs | [2023] UKUT 100 (AAC) | UA-2021-000785-TC - Whether tax credits eight-week temporary absence rule can be relaxed in cases where claimant unable to return to UK as a result of Covid-19-related travel restrictions
- CTC/225/2018 - EU Coordination rules override domestic residence conditions for tax credit but not other conditions of entitlement - in a case where a child lived in the EU and the claimant had not exercised Treaty rights in another Member State.
- CTC/16/2018 - Impact of Euro-Mediterranean Agreement between the European Communities and the Kingdom of Morocco on claims for child benefit and tax credit. Art 65 of the Agreement, where it applies, prevails over national law.
- CTC/2861/2016 - Regulation 13 of the Working Tax Credit (Entitlement and Maximum Rate) Regulations 2002 must be read in order not to deprive a claimant of social advantage in EU law
- CTC/899/2013 - Employment not authorised under the Worker Authorisation Regulations 2006 does not count as being 'Employed' for the purpose of Article 12 of EC Regulation 1612/68.
- CTC 1585/2012 - Temporary absence and ordinary residence where claimant appears to be ordinarily resident in more than 1 country for the same period - [2014] UKUT 0251 (AAC)
- CTC/2107/2010 - Whether couple where wife lived in Spain with children were entitled to child tax credit - [2011] UKUT 467 (AAC) (word copy)
- CTC/2520/2010 - Whether child tax credit exportable within EU where claimant in receipt of state retirement pension - [2010] UKUT 322 (AAC) (word copy)
- CTC/3179/2009 - Whether child tax credit payable to person living in EC country / whether CTC/1853/2009 correctly decided - [2010] UKUT 323 (AAC) (pdf copy)
- CTC/1180/2009 - Whether the conditions of entitlement to the 50 plus element involve unjustified discrimination against EU migrant workers - [2011] UKUT 40 (AAC) (pdf copy)
- CTC/1853/2009 - Child tax credit / entitlement whilst resident elsewhere in the European Economic Area - [2010] UKUT 49 (AAC) (pdf copy) | LITRG Summary
- CTC/3692/2008 - Calculation of backdated awards of child tax credit for a refugee - [2009] UKUT 73 (AAC) (pdf copy)
- UA-2021-001169-TC - In-year finalisation of tax credits award following universal credit claim should be based on ‘notional’ current year income calculated using actual income received in part-year
- CTC/1974/2019 (V) - Tribunal was correct to find that no reduction could be made from claimant’s income for investments in overseas property when assessing tax credits entitlement
- CTC 2630 2011 - Whether a couple who were divorcing were members of the same 'household' - [2012] UKUT 230 (AAC) (word copy)
- CTC/1699/2009 - Calculation of household income where couple separate during course of tax year / notification of appeal hearing to both joint claimants where one appeals - [2010] UKUT 159(AAC) (pdf copy)
- CTC/2270/2007 - R(TC) 1/08 - Whether partner's earnings before becoming a member of a couple should be taken into account as income (pdf copy)
- CTC/2113/2006 - Calculation of income for tax credit purposes (pdf copy)
- CTC/110/2004 - R(TC) 2/04 - Overpayments of Working Families' Tax Credit and diminishment of notional capital (pdf copy)
- CTC/4749/2003 - Consideration of capital / funds employed and risked in business (pdf copy)
- CTC/2494/2018 - Actual profitablity and a certain level of regular financial transactions are not essential to the definition of "self-employed" for the purposes of entitlement to working tax credit. The case involves the interaction between a s16 decision which had been followed by a s18 decision and reflects on the findings in both [2018] AACR 2 [2018] AACR 2ws and CTC/283/2018
- CTC/648/2018 - Payments made in settlement of employment tribunal case counted as earned income
- CSTC/283/2018 - Working tax credit - definition of "self-employed" in the Working Tax Credit (Entitlement and Maximum Rate) Regulations 2002 - relevance of profitability and "genuine and effective" in the test of carrying on a trade, profession or occupation "on a commercial basis" - circumstances in which the Upper Tribunal will hear an appeal against a decision of the First-tier Tribunal in a case which challenges a decision under Section 16 of the Tax Credits Act 2002 when a Section 18 decision has subsequently been issued
- CTC/585/2017 - Considers issues relating to self employment for working tax credit purposes, including whether claimant’s trade was 'on a commercial basis', 'with a view to the realisation of profits' and 'regular and organised'
- CTC/5443/2014 - It is not possible to rely on reg 7D (4 week run-on) to meet the condition in reg 5(3) (maternity leave etc.) of having been engaged in qualifying remunerative work immediately before the beginning of the period
- CTC/2033/2015 - Work done ‘in expectation of payment’ for working tax credit eligibility
- CTC/1945/2015 - Proper interpretation of regulation 6 of the ‘Entitlement and Maximum Rate’ regulations. Case considers the position where claimant was in receipt of contribution-based ESA immediately following a period where she received SSP for 28 weeks. The decision finds in favour of HMRC and that entitlement to WTC ended on the expiry of the 28-week period of SSP
- CTC/1343/2015 - Meaning, in the context of a self-employed claimant, of 'in expectation of payment' / relationship between sections 16 and 18 of the Tax Credits Act 2002.
- CTC/4337/2014 - Whether street entertainer was in remunerative work / tribunal wrong to rely on European Court of Justice decision in Tolsma
- CTC/4056/2013 - Considers whether backdating should be awarded on a contested claim for child tax credit where payment has already been made to the other parent
- CTC/3271/2011 & CF/3272/2011 - Backdating claims for tax credits and child benefit where claimant is granted retrospective indefinite leave to remain (heard together) - [2012] UKUT 121 (AAC)
- CTC/720/2010 - Disability element / whether telephone claim for disability living allowance adequate notification for tax credit purposes - [2010] UKUT 483 (AAC) (word copy)
- CTC/3692/2008 - Calculation of backdated awards of child tax credit for a refugee - [2009] UKUT 73 (AAC) (pdf copy)
- CTC/2878/2008 - Backdating disability element / whether requires notification of fact that DLA claim made - [2009] UKUT 42 (AAC) (pdf copy) | LITRG Summary
- CTC/591/2008 - Refusal of backdating request / discrimination under the Race Relations Act (pdf copy) | LITRG Summary
- CSTC/326/2005 - Whether transitional rules on backdating of CTC are ultra vires / contrary to European Convention on Human Rights (pdf copy)
- CTC/2165/2017 - Once the disability element of working tax credit has been awarded under Case A, B. E or F, it continues in payment on an indefinite basis until the claimant either ceases to be entitled to working tax credit or ceases to have a disability which puts her or him at a disadvantage in getting a job.
- CTC/3231/2016 - Whether a person who incorrectly had the disability element paid as part of their working tax credit award for the preceding year satisfies the conditions for entitlement under Case G (regulation 9(8) of the Working Tax Credit (Entitlement and Maximum Rate) Regulations 2002) in the current year
- CTC/720/2010 - Disability element / whether telephone claim for disability living allowance adequate notification for tax credit purposes - [2010] UKUT 483 (AAC) (word copy)
- CTC/2878/2008 - Backdating disability element / whether requires notification of fact that DLA claim made - [2009] UKUT 42 (AAC) (pdf copy) | LITRG Summary
- CSTC/76/2006 - Joint claims and qualifying conditions for entitlement to a disability element (pdf copy)
- CTC/643/2005 - R(TC) 1/06 - Whether entitlement to DLA at date of claim gives entitlement to WTC for the whole year (pdf copy) | LITRG Summary
- CTC/720/2010 - Disability element / whether telephone claim for disability living allowance adequate notification for tax credit purposes - [2010] UKUT 483 (AAC) (word copy)
- CTC/643/2005 - R(TC) 1/06 - Whether entitlement to DLA at date of claim gives entitlement to WTC for the whole year (pdf copy) | LITRG Summary
- CTC/1630/2005 - R(TC) 2/06 - Claiming as a single person when separated from partner (pdf copy)
- CTC/1106/2002 - R(TC) 1/04 - Whether bank holidays should be disregarded in calculating average hours worked (pdf copy)
- UA-2021-001437-TC and UA-2021-001302-TC - Tribunal hearing appeal against HMRC decision to end tax credits following universal credit claim is limited to determining whether SSWP is in fact satisfied that claimant meets basic conditions of entitlement to universal credit
UA-2020-000563-TC - Tribunal hearing appeal against HMRC decision to terminate tax credits following claim for universal credit did not have jurisdiction to consider whether DWP was entitled to be satisfied that basic universal credit conditions were met - UA-2020-001557-TC - Circumstances in which a person for whom tax credits have not been abolished may make a fresh claim following termination of an award
- CTC/73/2021 - Reference in transition regulations to universal credit basic condition of being 'in Great Britain' under section 4(1)(c) of Welfare Reform Act 2012 is freestanding and not subject to qualifications in regulations authorised by Act
- CTC/1514/2020 - Circumstances in which a person for whom tax credits have not been abolished may make a fresh claim following termination of an award
- CTC/903/2020 - Where a claimant has not made a claim for tax credit on the correct claim form, there is a right of appeal against whether they have provided relevant information but not against whether it may be treated as a claim
- CTC/2649/2019 & CTC/392/2020 - Termination of joint tax credits award when spouse died did not constitute unlawful discrimination against widower who was not eligible for universal credit due to capital
- CTC/2193/2019 - Withdrawal of a universal credit claim before the Department for Work and Pensions had issued a ‘stop notice’ for the purposes of regulation 8 of the Universal Credit (Transitional Provisions) Regulations 2014 meant that the claimant’s entitlement to tax credit was not terminated under regulation 8(2)
- CTC/1276/2018 - Transition of tax credits to universal credit - claimant made a claim for universal credit by mistake - Secretary of State issued stop notice to Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs - claimant later withdrew claim - nature of withdrawal and whether retrospective in effect
- CTC/644/2018 - Date of claim for tax credits by claimant who had applied for asylum and been recognised as refugee - whether telephones request for tax credits claim form amounted to a claim for tax credits - regulation 5 of TC (Claims and Notifications) Regs 2002, CTC/31/2006 and ZM v HMRC (TC) [2014] AACR 17 considered
- CTC/982/2017 - Whether information provided in response to HMRC enquiry - challenge to HMRC disentitlement decision under s.18 TCA 2002 - need for the tribunal to scrutinise HMRC case with ‘studied scepticism’.
- CTC/862/2017 - Amendments made by the Working Tax Credit (Entitlement and Maximum Rate) (Amendment) Regulations 2015 and do not apply to previous tax years.
- CTC/1514/2015 - Tribunal procedure and practice – decision explores lapsing of appeals and tribunal practice, in particular Tribunal and HMRC’s approach to decisions under section 16
- CTC/1260/2015 (Reported as [2016] AACR 46) - Proper approach to the imposition of a penalty following the claimant having allegedly 'underestimated your income when there was no basis for the amount of income declared'
- CTC/29/2015 - Correct approach to S.16(1) TCA decisions
- CTC/3045/2014 - Onus of proof lies with HMRC to show 'reasonable grounds for believing' a claimant is not entitled to tax credits when terminating an award
- CTC/4246/2012 - Discussion about the construction of Reg 8 (2)c of claims and regulations. UT decided case without HMRC's submission when it failed to comply with time limit
- CTC/3901/2012 - Failure to send appeal response and documents to claimant because of ‘data security issues’ was error of law - [2013] UKUT 444 (AAC) (word copy)
- CTC/2325/2011 & CTC/2326/2011 - Decisions consider the right to a fair hearing under Article 6 of ECHR and set out the position in relation to rights of appeal in decisions about the validity of a claim (heard together)- [2013] UKUT 547 (AAC) (word copy)
- CTC/1474/2011 - Duty of HMRC to provide recordings of telephone conversations - [2013] UKUT 530 (AAC) (word copy)
- CTC/1023/2010 - Whether tax credit claim made / whether tribunal had jurisdiction to hear appeal - [2011] UKUT 199 (AAC) (word copy)
- CTC/31/2006 - Exercise of discretion and right to a fair hearing (pdf copy)
- CTC/2612/2005 - Whether non-appellant partner has a right to a fair hearing before a tribunal making a decision on a joint claim (pdf copy)
- CTC/4025/2003 - Overpayment - true representation on form not invalidated by deeming provision (pdf copy)
- CTC/1106/2002 - R(TC) 1/04 - Whether bank holidays should be disregarded in calculating average hours worked (pdf copy)
- CTC/993/2016 - 'Statement Like an Award Notice' (SLAN) issued by HMRC treated as section 18 decision to ensure Tribunal has jurisdiction to address claimant's grievance.
- CTC/1544/2015 - 'Statement Like an Award Notice' (SLAN) is not appealable - Failure of HMRC to put copy of decision under appeal before the FTT.
- CH/2615/2010 - Cause of housing benefit overpayment / whether tax credit claimant could reasonably have been expected to realise she was being overpaid - [2011] UKUT 242 (AAC) (pdf copy)
- CTC/886/2021 - Refusal to extend time to apply for mandatory reconsideration of tax credit decision gives rise to right of appeal to First-tier Tribunal
- CSTC/466/2019 - First-tier Tribunal in its social entitlement jurisdiction is a 'court' within section 1 of the Vexatious Actions (Scotland) Act 1898
- CTC/9/2019 - PS v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (ESA) [2017] UKUT 55 (AAC) holds that the First-tier Tribunal is not required, as a matter of law, to telephone an absent claimant before deciding to go ahead, but rather that rules 2 and 31 should be applied. The present case considers the application of PS and those rules to a case involving 7 linked appeals, listed for a whole day, attended by two presenting officers and with large amounts of money at stake and concludes that the FtT was obliged to telephone the claimant in the circumstances of the case.
- CTC/3409/2017 - Purported appeal against a non-appealable overpayment decision does not confer jurisdiction on the judge to consider the validity of the entitlement decision
- CTC/2376/2017 - A decision taken by HMRC not to award a tax credit under section 14 of the Tax Credits Act 2002 cannot be followed by a final entitlement decision under section 18 of the 2002 Act. Therefore, no section 18 decision may cause an appeal to the First-tier Tribunal against such a decision to lapse. To the extent that a three-judge panel of the Upper Tribunal LS & RS HMRC [2018] AACR 2; [2017] UKUT 0257 (AAC)) expressed the contrary view, its comments were obiter and should not be followed
- CTC/3617/2016 - Matters to consider when tribunals exercise discretion to set or alter the level of a tax credit penalty
- CTC/2497/2016 - Appeal addresses concerns about the inadequacy of the appeal response provided by HMRC and its failure to put the claimed justification for its decision to the claimant prior to its production of that response.
- CTC/865/2016 - Whether decision made under section 16 or section 18 of Tax Credits Act 2004 (TCA) - implementation of FtT decisions by HMRC - whether further HMRC decision called for - superior status of FtT decisions and how take effect under the TCA - changing of FtT decisions by HMRC
- CTC/3592/2015 - Whether an appeal under section 16 of the Tax Credits Act lapses when a decision under section 18 is made. See Appeals section.
- CTC/3228/2015 - Impact on a section 16 appeal to the First-tier Tribunal of HMRC making a section 18 decision. See Appeals section.
- CTC/1954/2015 - New judgment that considers rights of appeal in relation to tax credit decisions before and after 6 April 2014
- CTC/1879/2015 - Tribunal wrong to refuse to hear evidence or adjourn hearing when appellant arrived late for appeal / requirement for evidence of living together as husband and wife
- CTC/1212/2015 - Section 18 (end-of-year) decision in tax credits lapses an appeal against a previous section 16 (in-year) decision. See Appeals section.
- CTC/5461/2014 - Tribunal rules can enable an extension of tax credit appeal time limits set by primary and other legislation
- CTC/4867/2014 - This case considers the quality of HMRC decision-making, onus of proof and the quality of HMRC’s appeal submissions. The decision finds in the claimant’s favour
- CTC/3742/2014 - HMRC's failure to provide tribunal with relevant evidence, contrary to its 'current and compliant approach'
- CTC/636/2014 - This case considers the power of HMCTS to extend the time for appealing and the importance of providing the right documents to the appellant and the tribunal.
- CTC/947/2013 - Adding respondents, practice on appeal by unsuccessful parent - adding successful parent to a respondent
- CTC/3978/2012 - Decision discusses initial award and entitlement decisions, whether decisions are correct by reason of Official Error and considers whether there has been a change of circumstance - [2013] UKUT 519 (AAC) (word copy). See Appeals section.
- CTC/1039/2012 - Right of appeal if claim is rejected by HMRC – claim had been rejected by HMRC due to lack of NINO but this case discusses whether that decision is appealable
- CTC/345/2012 - Whether appeal against tax credit decision was out of time - [2013] UKUT 199 (AAC)
- CTC/1023/2010 - Whether tax credit claim made / whether tribunal had jurisdiction to hear appeal - [2011] UKUT 199 (AAC) (word copy)
- CTC/31/2006 - Exercise of discretion and right to a fair hearing (pdf copy)
- CTC/2662/2005 - Scope of appeal rights against section 16 and section 18 decisions (pdf copy). See Appeals section.
- CTC/3543/2004 - Whether someone can be a party to proceedings without lodging an appeal / joint recoverability of overpayment (pdf copy)
- CTC/2090/2004 -Tribunal's failure to summon wife to give evidence not in breach of its duty to act inquisitorially (pdf copy)
- CTC/3433/2003 - R(TC) 1/05 - Refusal to revise & jurisdiction of appeal tribunal (pdf copy)
- KI v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions | [2023] UKUT 212 (AAC) | UA-2018-000285-TC - Failure of data-sharing exercise between DWP and HMRC, where claimant did not subsequently report change of circumstances, did not amount to ‘official error’
- CTC/3759/2014 - considering the question of whether by completing annual renewal paperwork the claimant materially contributed to an error which omitted the inclusion of the child disability element in earlier awards
Aspects of decision making (e.g. evidence, burden of proof)
- CTC/1902/2017 - Claimant who fraudulently obtained refugee status was not entitled to tax credits that she obtained relying upon that status
- CTC/2925/2016 - FTT decisions on appeals against decisions made under s.16 Tax Credits Act should be phrased in terms of "amending" or "terminating" an "award", not in terms of "entitlement" to tax credits. Such decisions should not replicate HMRC's computer "workaround" under which s.16 decisions that should terminate an award from the outset or amend it by reducing it to nil are implemented by making an award of tax credits for a single day
- CTC/1938/2016 - A section 16 appeal to a First-tier Tribunal lapses when a section 18 decision has been made. A three-judge panel was appointed to hear the appeals as two recent UT decisions had been taken which not only conflicted with each other but also with the UT's general approach in such cases. Included among the issues before the Panel were whether a section 16 decision ceased to have effect after a section 18 decision was made for the same tax year, what effect that had on appeal against the section 16 decision and what a FtT should do about it.
- CTC/610/2016 - Child care costs. Failure by HMRC to produce all relevant evidence on appeal
- CTC/1841/2015 - Whether claimant's children were in receipt of relevant childcare / relationship between sections 16 and 18 of the Tax Credits Act 2002
- CTC/4184/2014 - Whether child tax credit 'decisions' should be set aside for lakc of coherence and connection to legal powers
- CTC/919/2015 - The case involves a single claim. HMRC's assertion that the claimant was part of a couple fails to take account of evidence provided by the claimant who was 'badly let down' by HMRC's decision-making. Claimant's appeal is allowed
- CTC/455/2015 - Tribunal made cohabitation decision on basis of insufficient evidence, failed to consider appropriateness and amount of penalty and failed to consider whether special steps needed to obtain claimant's evidence
- CTC/160/2015 - This case determined that the burden of proof is on HMRC when terminating a tax credits award and that shared responsibility for children should not be presumed in absence of evidence to the contrary
- CTC/5672/2014 - The case concerns an enquiry under section 19, making a decision which was altering a final decision under section 18. In those circumstances, it is argued, it is for HMRC to demonstrate that that final decision under section 18 had been the wrong one. HMRC produced no evidence to that effect to the FtT and on the arguments supplied it was found that the appellant was separated and had no more than a hope of reconciliation with their spouse at the time of the claim and the single claim was correct
- CTC/5600/2014 - This case determined that the onus of proof is on HMRC to establish that a claimant is not entitled to tax credits as a single person because she is a member of a couple
- CTC/1824/2014 - This decision is concerned with an undeclared partner case. It highlights the importance of the onus of truth being squarely with HMRC when considering making decisions under s16 TCA and explores the steps that are required in some depth. 'However, given the onus of proof rests squarely on HMRC under section 16, in my judgment the correct starting point was that it was for HMRC to make good the evidential basis for the "reasonable grounds for believing" statutory test it was seeking to rely on. Conversely, the starting point was not for the appellant to show that the award had been properly made (i.e. that she was a single claimant).' The case also exposes other weaknesses in HMRC decision-making and is critical of the quality of the appeal submission
- CTC/1055/2014 - Tribunal is not entitled to draw adverse inference about failure to provide evidence where claimant not given adequate explanation of what would be appropriate evidence. Case involves a single claim which HMRC assert should have been a joint claim, but HMRC failed to supply evidence of the facts they asserted and claimant was not given adequate indication of what evidence she could provide which would be appropriate in her case. Decision also critical of quality of HMRC's submission
- CTC/3592/2015 - Whether an appeal under section 16 of the Tax Credit Act lapses when a decision under section 18 is made. See Appeals section
- CTC/3228/2015 - Impact on section 16 appeak to the First-tier Tribunal of HMRC making a section 18 decision. See Appeals section
- CTC/4867/2014 - This case considers the quality of HMRC decision-making, onus of proof and the quality of HMRC's appeal submissions. The decision finds in the claimant's favour
- CTC/3742/2014 - HMRC's failure to provide tribunal with relevant evidence, contrary to its 'current and compliant approach'
Last reviewed/updated 11 October 2023