Would appreciate some thoughts on this:
I had a "grey area" situation about 10 years ago with regard to whether or not I should declare a particular recurring item as income.
I phoned revenue and explained the situation, and they told me to email the details for consideration, which I did.
I gave all the details, and they subsequently replied (by signed email, not a formal letter) to tell me that I did not need to pay income tax on that source (or declare it as income) and explained why. So I did not include it in returns.
However, I've just been looking at the revenue website (and other online commentaries), and it seems that the advice I was given was wrong, or at least is highly contestable. (I've checked and the policy when I sought the advice was the same then as it is now.)
I no longer have this source of income - it ended a few years ago - but I know that if I was ever audited, and the audit judged it should be treated as income, I would be hit with a significant tax bill for potentially several years worth of it, plus an interest charge which is growing with every passing year. Plus the work of preparing records to suit the new revenue treatment would be very taxing (pardon the pun). It is paralysing my financial decisions for the future as it is in the back of my mind that I might one day need to fund a tax bill, even though I was completely open and honest in my initial query and acted in good faith, and it is only now (when that income source no longer exists) that I have noticed the issue with the advice I received.
I consulted an accountant several years ago, and he wasn't hugely concerned. He certainly didn't recommend making a disclosure.
But, it's there at the back of my mind.
What do you think?
I had a "grey area" situation about 10 years ago with regard to whether or not I should declare a particular recurring item as income.
I phoned revenue and explained the situation, and they told me to email the details for consideration, which I did.
I gave all the details, and they subsequently replied (by signed email, not a formal letter) to tell me that I did not need to pay income tax on that source (or declare it as income) and explained why. So I did not include it in returns.
However, I've just been looking at the revenue website (and other online commentaries), and it seems that the advice I was given was wrong, or at least is highly contestable. (I've checked and the policy when I sought the advice was the same then as it is now.)
I no longer have this source of income - it ended a few years ago - but I know that if I was ever audited, and the audit judged it should be treated as income, I would be hit with a significant tax bill for potentially several years worth of it, plus an interest charge which is growing with every passing year. Plus the work of preparing records to suit the new revenue treatment would be very taxing (pardon the pun). It is paralysing my financial decisions for the future as it is in the back of my mind that I might one day need to fund a tax bill, even though I was completely open and honest in my initial query and acted in good faith, and it is only now (when that income source no longer exists) that I have noticed the issue with the advice I received.
I consulted an accountant several years ago, and he wasn't hugely concerned. He certainly didn't recommend making a disclosure.
But, it's there at the back of my mind.
What do you think?