Owing revenue money from 11 years ago

hat thing about the system not allowing a P21 to be generated because of a prior year liability, sounds like nonsense. It makes no sense; a P21 is the equivalent of a tax assessment, and each year is standalone, so I can’t see any reason why the system could be set up in such a way. I’d say it actually might be contrary to the tax legislation for Revenue to refuse to issue you with a P21, system issue or not, that’s their problem to solve.

There’s also no reason why they shouldn’t be able to take the 2008 underpayment out of the 2015 refund, that’s what normally happens in these situations (although normally it’s not 10+ year old liability being collected).

I think you may need to call back and say you want to speak to someone more senior to complain, as what you were told today just sounds plain wrong. They do have a lot of very new and inexperienced people manning the phones these days so it could just be down to that...


It is with the audit department, I did ask to speak to someone else or come in for a meeting and was told that she is the only one i can deal with on the case. She did say on the phone she wasn't trying to pull the wool over my eyes.

as the p21 statement said "it demanded the money within 30 days" & not this amount is going to be offset again future years.
this is why she could not override the system

her hands are tied till I paid with the collections team
 
I ran into this discussion while looking for something else. It's strange on how the system works in Ireland. In most places where I lived in Europe there is a specific amount of time within which the tax authority has the power of requesting and enforcing a tax payment. It's normally 10 years. If the taxpayer has been informed about an outstanding payment and the taxpayer has disregarded it, then the tax authority (before the 10 years term expires) has to take other steps to recoup the credit. That step (even a simple reminder registered letter) will allow the tax authority to open another 10 years "window" starting from that last action.
This is Ireland unfortunately. If they did this you can be sure there would be loads of people moving around when the ten years is coming up to make sure they cannot get that letter. Good example of how our legal system works is the current case of the ex TD who is slithering around to avoid serving of papers (his name rhymes with Saliva Ballally btw)
 
Yes self access until 2012

Your husband would have received Notices of Assessment rather than P21s for the period during which he was self-assessed.

You say that the underpayment as a result of the One-Parent Family Credit was collected by reduction of his tax credits for the years from 2013 to 2015.

It appears there is an outstanding income tax liability (self-assessment).

This may or may not be connected to the One-Parent Family credit.

You need to contact the Self-Assessment section rather than the PAYE section in order to discuss the matter.
 
1. Your husband owes €2K not €200K. Two grand is a paltry amount to Revenue in the greater scheme of things.
2. There appears to be something wrong when Revenue owes you money and you owe them money and they cannot or will not tie both amounts which would be common sense.
3. Worse again, you are not allowed to contact anybody in Revenue dealing directly with your case. All you can do is contact a "bureau" where somebody writes out their version of your complaint which he/she might or might not pass on and you hope you will be contacted by some reasonable decision maker. Don't hold your breath, I reckon the only contact you'll have with Revenue is their written bill for the €2K. You'll challenge this and guess what you're back at square 1 again.
4. Revenue can charge you 8% per annum on monies owed to them. If they have money for you, they pay you the owed amount with no interest no matter how long they possessed it.
5. It's only €2K, but if I were you I'd contact an independent qualified tax advisor. It'll cost, but it buys an easy mind for you in the future.
6. There are other options too like writing to the Tax Appeals Board or even contacting the Ombudsman and all for the failure of the Revenue Commissioners to see Common Sense.
 
1. Your husband owes €2K not €200K. Two grand is a paltry amount to Revenue in the greater scheme of things.
2. There appears to be something wrong when Revenue owe you money and you owe them money and they cannot or will not tie both amounts which would be common sense.
3. Worse again, you cannot contact anybody in Revenue dealing with your case. All you can do is contact a "bureau" where somebody writes out their version of your complaint which he/she might or might no pass on and you hope you will be contacted by some reasonable decision maker. Don't hold your breath, I reckon the only contact you'll have with Revenue is their written bill for the €2K. You'll challenge this and guess what you're back at square 1 again.

Whoa back up a bit! You don’t know what the situation is.

To me it looks like a Revenue compliance intervention, in particular because of the direct contact by telephone call.

Revenue don’t make direct interventions for nothing.

There is no need for the OP to go to the expense of a tax advisor.
 
HI Sophrosyne, the situation is as follows as per the thread:-
1. The OP owes €2K to Revenue.
2. Revenue owes some amount to the OP.
3. Revenue won't play a debt against a credit (Crazy! and a sacred cow that needs to be changed).
4. The OP cannot speak to any Revenue decision maker re the situation. It appears Revenue decision makers are not contacting the OP except to send out a written invoice.
5. Civil Servants need to be civil (basic raison d'etre). They are there to serve the people (bottom line). The OP is not being treated fairly (obvious).
6. Revenue is understaffed (not mentioned here) but that is not the OP's problem.
7. I reckon everybody should use a Tax Advisor on occasion e.g. coming up to retirement. But, in this instance I feel it will be money well spent.
8. If the above is not the real situation, then please advise in easy readable terms (I'm all ears and willing to learn). "Compliance Intervention" is gobbledegook to me.
 
Last edited:
1. The OP owes €2K to Revenue.
2. Revenue owes some amount to the OP.
3. Revenue won't play a debt against a credit (Crazy! and a sacred cow that needs to be changed).
4. The OP cannot speak to any Revenue decision maker re the situation. It appears Revenue decision makers are not contacting the OP except to send out a written invoice.

But Revenue did contact the OP’s husband by telephone.

He had an opportunity to sort out matters in the course of this call but it appears he did not.

From her posts it is clear that the OP does not know what transpired during that telephone call and consequently neither do we.

For instance I cannot tell whether the 2008 debt is solely due to One-Parent Family credit or an unconnected historic debt or indeed whether it is net of the Incapacitated Child Credits.
 
1. Your husband owes €2K not €200K. Two grand is a paltry amount to Revenue in the greater scheme of things.
2. There appears to be something wrong when Revenue owes you money and you owe them money and they cannot or will not tie both amounts which would be common sense.
3. Worse again, you are not allowed to contact anybody in Revenue dealing directly with your case. All you can do is contact a "bureau" where somebody writes out their version of your complaint which he/she might or might not pass on and you hope you will be contacted by some reasonable decision maker. Don't hold your breath, I reckon the only contact you'll have with Revenue is their written bill for the €2K. You'll challenge this and guess what you're back at square 1 again.
4. Revenue can charge you 8% per annum on monies owed to them. If they have money for you, they pay you the owed amount with no interest no matter how long they possessed it.
5. It's only €2K, but if I were you I'd contact an independent qualified tax advisor. It'll cost, but it buys an easy mind for you in the future.
6. There are other options too like writing to the Tax Appeals Board or even contacting the Ombudsman and all for the failure of the Revenue Commissioners to see Common Sense.

Multiple inaccuracies / things that are incorrect in the above post.
 
1. I'm still awaiting Torblednam to return here to point out my alleged inaccuracies. But, I've read his/her previous posts on the matter and he/she and I are saying almost the same thing. It appears the only thing we dispute is the chance of speaking directly with a decision maker in Revenue.

2. Torblednam did say "They do have a lot of very new and inexperienced people manning the phones these days so it could just be down to that... " How does he/she know that? If this is true it's not the OP's problem. It's Revenue.
 
Back
Top