Accurate
Country-specific legal content
Drafted with legal expertise for each jurisdiction, far more thorough than AI-generated drafts that copy generic clauses across borders.
HMRC Tax AppealsUnited Kingdom
Free CGT 60-Day Late Filing Penalty Appeal Letter Template
A Capital Gains Tax 60-day late filing penalty appeal is the formal route for challenging an HMRC fixed, daily or tax-geared penalty issued under Finance Act 2009 Schedule 55 in respect of a United Kingdom Capital Gains Tax 60-day UK Property return. Use our free UK template to appeal within the 30-day appeal window under Schedule 55 paragraph 22, applying the Perrin v HMRC objective four-stage reasonable excuse test and the Christian Peter Candy v HMRC [2024] UKFTT 416 (TC) adviser-reliance principle that applies on these facts across England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.
Free to useInstant PDFNo account required
PDF (free) + editable Word (.docx) with Expert
Capital Gains Tax 60-Day Return — Late Filing Penalty Appeal
Appeal Under Finance Act 2009 Schedule 55 Paragraph 23 · 14 May 2026
Margaret Helen Ashworth
27 Beechwood Crescent, Leeds LS17 8QP
07700 900417
m.ashworth@email.co.uk
14 May 2026
Capital Gains Tax — HM Revenue and Customs
Capital Gains Tax, HM Revenue and Customs, BX9 1AS, United Kingdom
CGT 60-DAY RETURN — LATE FILING PENALTY APPEAL
Penalty Ref: CGT-PEN-2026-7714-203 | UTR: 6677889900
Dear Sir or Madam,
I write to appeal against the fixed £100 penalty (Finance Act 2009 Schedule 55 paragraph 3) issued by HMRC on 30 April 2026 (penalty reference CGT-PEN-2026-7714-203). The penalty relates to the Capital Gains Tax 60-day return for the disposal of 8 Riverbank Court, Harrogate HG2 0EJ which completed on 12 February 2026. The statutory 60-day reporting deadline for that disposal was 13 April 2026; the return was in fact submitted via the HMRC CGT on UK Property Service on 29 April 2026. This appeal is lodged within the 30-day period prescribed by Finance Act 2009 Schedule 55 paragraph 22 (the prescribed appeal deadline is 30 May 2026). I rely on the reasonable excuse defence under Finance Act 2009 Schedule 55 paragraph 23. The factual basis of the reasonable excuse is set out below.
I write to appeal against the fixed £100 penalty (Finance Act 2009 Schedule 55 paragraph 3) issued by HMRC on 30 April 2026 (penalty reference CGT-PEN-2026-7714-203). The penalty relates to the Capital Gains Tax 60-day return for the disposal of 8 Riverbank Court, Harrogate HG2 0EJ which completed on 12 February 2026. The statutory 60-day reporting deadline for that disposal was 13 April 2026; the return was in fact submitted via the HMRC CGT on UK Property Service on 29 April 2026. This appeal is lodged within the 30-day period prescribed by Finance Act 2009 Schedule 55 paragraph 22 (the prescribed appeal deadline is 30 May 2026). I rely on the reasonable excuse defence under Finance Act 2009 Schedule 55 paragraph 23. The factual basis of the reasonable excuse is set out below.
1.
TAXPAYER IDENTIFICATION
Full name: Margaret Helen Ashworth
Unique Taxpayer Reference (UTR): 6677889900
National Insurance number: AB 88 77 66 D
Correspondence address: 27 Beechwood Crescent, Leeds LS17 8QP
Telephone: 07700 900417
Email: m.ashworth@email.co.uk
Unique Taxpayer Reference (UTR): 6677889900
National Insurance number: AB 88 77 66 D
Correspondence address: 27 Beechwood Crescent, Leeds LS17 8QP
Telephone: 07700 900417
Email: m.ashworth@email.co.uk
2.
PROPERTY DISPOSAL AND FILING HISTORY
Property address: 8 Riverbank Court, Harrogate HG2 0EJ
Date of completion (disposal date): 12 February 2026
Statutory 60-day reporting deadline: 13 April 2026
Date the return was in fact filed: 29 April 2026
PPDCGT reference: XAPD00987654321
Statutory framework for the return: sections 13 and 14 and Schedule 2 of the Finance Act 2019 (as amended by the Finance (No.2) Act 2021)
Date of completion (disposal date): 12 February 2026
Statutory 60-day reporting deadline: 13 April 2026
Date the return was in fact filed: 29 April 2026
PPDCGT reference: XAPD00987654321
Statutory framework for the return: sections 13 and 14 and Schedule 2 of the Finance Act 2019 (as amended by the Finance (No.2) Act 2021)
3.
PENALTY UNDER APPEAL
Type of penalty: fixed £100 penalty (Finance Act 2009 Schedule 55 paragraph 3)
Date of the penalty notice: 30 April 2026
Penalty notice reference: CGT-PEN-2026-7714-203
Amount of penalty: £100
Statutory framework: Finance Act 2009 Schedule 55
Appeal deadline: 30 May 2026 (30 days from the date of the penalty notice)
Date of the penalty notice: 30 April 2026
Penalty notice reference: CGT-PEN-2026-7714-203
Amount of penalty: £100
Statutory framework: Finance Act 2009 Schedule 55
Appeal deadline: 30 May 2026 (30 days from the date of the penalty notice)
4.
BRIEF REASONABLE EXCUSE STATEMENT
I disagree with the £100 late filing penalty issued for the 60-day CGT return relating to the disposal of 8 Riverbank Court, Harrogate on 12 February 2026. My conveyancer was specifically instructed to attend to the post-completion 60-day reporting obligation. Owing to a misunderstanding within the firm the return was not submitted within the statutory window. As soon as I became aware of the failure I instructed alternative advisers and the return was filed on 29 April 2026. The Christian Peter Candy v HMRC reasonable excuse principle applies on these facts.
5.
REASONABLE EXCUSE — PERRIN FOUR-STAGE OBJECTIVE TEST
The Upper Tribunal in Perrin v HMRC [2018] UKUT 0156 (TCC) settled the four-stage objective test that HMRC and the First-tier Tribunal must apply when considering the reasonable excuse defence in paragraph 23 of Schedule 55:
Stage 1 — Facts asserted: establish the facts the taxpayer asserts give rise to a reasonable excuse.
Stage 2 — Objective assessment: consider whether, viewed objectively, those facts amount to a reasonable excuse for the default.
Stage 3 — Excuse ceased: identify the date on which any reasonable excuse ceased.
Stage 4 — Remedy without unreasonable delay: decide whether the taxpayer remedied the failure without unreasonable delay after that time.
Category of excuse relied on: failure of a professional adviser (conveyancer, solicitor, accountant) on whom the taxpayer reasonably relied for the 60-day return.
Stage 1 — Facts asserted:
The disposal of 8 Riverbank Court, Harrogate completed on 12 February 2026, with the statutory 60-day reporting deadline being 13 April 2026. I instructed Greenway and Co, my conveyancer for the sale, to attend to the post-completion 60-day CGT return. The retainer letter dated 18 January 2026 specifically identified the 60-day CGT reporting obligation as falling within the scope of the engagement. On 21 February 2026 I provided Greenway and Co with the acquisition cost paperwork, completion statement and disposal proceeds figures so that the return could be prepared. On 8 April 2026 — five days before the statutory deadline — I emailed Greenway and Co requesting confirmation that the return had been filed; I received no response. On 24 April 2026, eleven days after the deadline, I received an HMRC penalty notice and immediately learned that the return had not in fact been filed. I instructed alternative advisers (Hartley and Partners) the same day and the return was submitted on 29 April 2026.
Stage 3 — Date on which the reasonable excuse ceased: 24 April 2026.
Stage 4 — Remedy without unreasonable delay:
After I learned on 24 April 2026 that the return had not been filed, I instructed alternative advisers the same day, provided them with the acquisition and disposal paperwork the following morning, and the return was lodged via the HMRC CGT on UK Property Service on 29 April 2026. The total elapsed time between the excuse ceasing and the return being filed was five days, which is reasonable given that fresh advisers had to be instructed and the paperwork transferred. The objective test in Perrin is satisfied.
Stage 1 — Facts asserted: establish the facts the taxpayer asserts give rise to a reasonable excuse.
Stage 2 — Objective assessment: consider whether, viewed objectively, those facts amount to a reasonable excuse for the default.
Stage 3 — Excuse ceased: identify the date on which any reasonable excuse ceased.
Stage 4 — Remedy without unreasonable delay: decide whether the taxpayer remedied the failure without unreasonable delay after that time.
Category of excuse relied on: failure of a professional adviser (conveyancer, solicitor, accountant) on whom the taxpayer reasonably relied for the 60-day return.
Stage 1 — Facts asserted:
The disposal of 8 Riverbank Court, Harrogate completed on 12 February 2026, with the statutory 60-day reporting deadline being 13 April 2026. I instructed Greenway and Co, my conveyancer for the sale, to attend to the post-completion 60-day CGT return. The retainer letter dated 18 January 2026 specifically identified the 60-day CGT reporting obligation as falling within the scope of the engagement. On 21 February 2026 I provided Greenway and Co with the acquisition cost paperwork, completion statement and disposal proceeds figures so that the return could be prepared. On 8 April 2026 — five days before the statutory deadline — I emailed Greenway and Co requesting confirmation that the return had been filed; I received no response. On 24 April 2026, eleven days after the deadline, I received an HMRC penalty notice and immediately learned that the return had not in fact been filed. I instructed alternative advisers (Hartley and Partners) the same day and the return was submitted on 29 April 2026.
Stage 3 — Date on which the reasonable excuse ceased: 24 April 2026.
Stage 4 — Remedy without unreasonable delay:
After I learned on 24 April 2026 that the return had not been filed, I instructed alternative advisers the same day, provided them with the acquisition and disposal paperwork the following morning, and the return was lodged via the HMRC CGT on UK Property Service on 29 April 2026. The total elapsed time between the excuse ceasing and the return being filed was five days, which is reasonable given that fresh advisers had to be instructed and the paperwork transferred. The objective test in Perrin is satisfied.
6.
PROFESSIONAL ADVISER RELIANCE — CHRISTIAN PETER CANDY V HMRC
In Christian Peter Candy v HMRC [2024] UKFTT 416 (TC) the First-tier Tribunal accepted that, on the facts before it, reliance on a professional adviser (a solicitor or conveyancer engaged for the property transaction itself) could amount to a reasonable excuse for the failure to file a 60-day CGT return within the statutory window, particularly where the regime was novel and the taxpayer had instructed the adviser specifically to attend to the post-completion CGT reporting obligation. The case is the leading FTT authority on the application of the Perrin test to the 60-day CGT regime and is directly in point on these facts.
The adviser-reliance facts relied on in the present case:
Greenway and Co were specifically instructed to deal with the 60-day CGT return — this was an express provision of the retainer letter dated 18 January 2026. The taxpayer was entitled to rely on the firm to discharge that obligation. The factual matrix is directly in point with the situation considered by the First-tier Tribunal in Christian Peter Candy v HMRC: a taxpayer who had specifically retained advisers to file the 60-day return, who provided the underlying paperwork in good time, and whose advisers failed to file. The reasonable excuse was made out on the Christian Peter Candy facts, and the FTT accepted that a reasonable person in the taxpayer's position would have relied on the adviser.
The adviser-reliance facts relied on in the present case:
Greenway and Co were specifically instructed to deal with the 60-day CGT return — this was an express provision of the retainer letter dated 18 January 2026. The taxpayer was entitled to rely on the firm to discharge that obligation. The factual matrix is directly in point with the situation considered by the First-tier Tribunal in Christian Peter Candy v HMRC: a taxpayer who had specifically retained advisers to file the 60-day return, who provided the underlying paperwork in good time, and whose advisers failed to file. The reasonable excuse was made out on the Christian Peter Candy facts, and the FTT accepted that a reasonable person in the taxpayer's position would have relied on the adviser.
7.
PENALTY QUANTUM REVIEW — SCHEDULE 55 PARAGRAPHS 3-6
The Finance Act 2009 Schedule 55 late filing regime imposes the penalty in defined stages: a fixed £100 penalty under paragraph 3 from the day after the filing deadline; a daily £10 penalty for up to 90 days under paragraph 4 once the return is three months late (capped at £900); a tax-geared penalty under paragraph 5 at six months late (the greater of £300 or 5 per cent of the tax due); and a further tax-geared penalty under paragraph 6 at twelve months late (the greater of £300 or 5 per cent of the tax due). For late payment, Schedule 56 imposes 5 per cent surcharges at 30 days, six months and twelve months late. Where a payment on account of the CGT has been made, it is credited against the tax due figure for the purpose of computing the tax-geared elements.
Breakdown of the penalty under appeal:
The penalty under appeal is the fixed £100 late filing penalty under Finance Act 2009 Schedule 55 paragraph 3. No daily penalty under paragraph 4 has accrued as the return was filed within the three-month window after the filing deadline. No 6-month or 12-month tax-geared penalties under paragraphs 5 or 6 apply on these facts.
Tax due figure relied on by HMRC for any tax-geared element: £18,420
Payment on account already made: £18,420 on 29 April 2026
Notice date: 30 April 2026
Breakdown of the penalty under appeal:
The penalty under appeal is the fixed £100 late filing penalty under Finance Act 2009 Schedule 55 paragraph 3. No daily penalty under paragraph 4 has accrued as the return was filed within the three-month window after the filing deadline. No 6-month or 12-month tax-geared penalties under paragraphs 5 or 6 apply on these facts.
Tax due figure relied on by HMRC for any tax-geared element: £18,420
Payment on account already made: £18,420 on 29 April 2026
Notice date: 30 April 2026
8.
SPECIAL REDUCTION — FA 2009 SCHEDULE 55 PARAGRAPH 16
Paragraph 16 of Schedule 55 confers a discretion on HMRC to reduce a penalty where the officer considers there are special circumstances. The discretion exists separately from the reasonable excuse defence in paragraph 23. The Upper Tribunal in HMRC v Hok Ltd [2012] UKUT 363 (TCC) confirmed that the First-tier Tribunal has no general fairness jurisdiction over Schedule 55 penalties — the statutory routes (reasonable excuse and special reduction) are the routes through which the appeal must run. Special circumstances must be more than the ordinary effects of complying with the 60-day regime and must apply uncommonly to the taxpayer.
Special circumstances relied on:
In the alternative, and without prejudice to the reasonable excuse defence, I rely on the special reduction power. The special circumstances are: (i) the taxpayer had no prior 60-day CGT compliance failures; (ii) the taxpayer specifically instructed and relied on a regulated conveyancer for the post-completion return; (iii) the payment on account of £18,420 was made on the same day the return was filed — no tax has been deprived of HMRC; (iv) the underlying default is properly attributable to adviser failure rather than to any conduct of the taxpayer.
First-time defaulter: the taxpayer has no prior Self Assessment or 60-day CGT compliance failures recorded by HMRC. The Upper Tribunal has consistently treated a clean prior record as relevant to proportionality.
Special circumstances relied on:
In the alternative, and without prejudice to the reasonable excuse defence, I rely on the special reduction power. The special circumstances are: (i) the taxpayer had no prior 60-day CGT compliance failures; (ii) the taxpayer specifically instructed and relied on a regulated conveyancer for the post-completion return; (iii) the payment on account of £18,420 was made on the same day the return was filed — no tax has been deprived of HMRC; (iv) the underlying default is properly attributable to adviser failure rather than to any conduct of the taxpayer.
First-time defaulter: the taxpayer has no prior Self Assessment or 60-day CGT compliance failures recorded by HMRC. The Upper Tribunal has consistently treated a clean prior record as relevant to proportionality.
9.
INTERNAL REVIEW AND FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL ESCALATION
If HMRC declines this appeal I rely on the right to request an HMRC internal review of the decision under section 49A of the Taxes Management Act 1970. The view-of-the-matter letter triggers a fresh 30-day window in which to escalate to the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) by way of form T240. The Tribunal has jurisdiction to determine the appeal de novo. Where HMRC declines internal review or where the review conclusion remains adverse, I shall lodge form T240 with the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) at PO Box 16972, Birmingham B16 6TZ.
Preferred route: if HMRC declines this appeal, the taxpayer will first request an HMRC internal review of the decision; the FTT route will be pursued only where the review conclusion remains adverse.
If HMRC declines this appeal, I will request an internal review under section 49A of the Taxes Management Act 1970 within 30 days. If the review conclusion remains adverse I will lodge form T240 with the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) at PO Box 16972, Birmingham B16 6TZ within the further 30-day window from the view-of-the-matter letter.
Preferred route: if HMRC declines this appeal, the taxpayer will first request an HMRC internal review of the decision; the FTT route will be pursued only where the review conclusion remains adverse.
If HMRC declines this appeal, I will request an internal review under section 49A of the Taxes Management Act 1970 within 30 days. If the review conclusion remains adverse I will lodge form T240 with the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) at PO Box 16972, Birmingham B16 6TZ within the further 30-day window from the view-of-the-matter letter.
10.
CONCLUSION AND DETERMINATION SOUGHT
I respectfully ask HMRC to cancel the fixed £100 penalty (Finance Act 2009 Schedule 55 paragraph 3) of £100 for the late filing of the 60-day CGT return in respect of the disposal of 8 Riverbank Court, Harrogate HG2 0EJ which completed on 12 February 2026. The reasonable excuse defence , the penalty quantum review, the special reduction power and (where applicable) the late appeal and review-route arguments set out above are relied on individually and cumulatively. Please acknowledge receipt of this appeal and notify me of the outcome in writing as soon as possible.
YOURS FAITHFULLY,
Margaret Helen Ashworth
Taxpayer — 14 May 2026
Date: ____________________
TAXPAYER
Margaret Helen Ashworth
Date: ____________________
Available as a print-ready PDF or an editable Microsoft Word (.docx) file.
What Is a CGT 60-Day Late Filing Penalty Appeal?
A CGT 60-day late filing penalty appeal is a written challenge to HMRC against a Finance Act 2009 Schedule 55 penalty issued in respect of a Capital Gains Tax on UK Property return that was not filed within the statutory 60-day window. The 60-day reporting and payment-on-account regime applies to UK-resident individuals disposing of UK residential property and sits in sections 13 and 14 and Schedule 2 of the Finance Act 2019 (as amended by Finance (No.2) Act 2021 — the window was extended from 30 days to 60 days from 27 October 2021).
The Schedule 55 late filing regime operates in defined stages — a £100 fixed penalty under paragraph 3 from the day after the deadline; a £10 per day daily penalty under paragraph 4 from three months late (capped at £900); a six-month tax-geared penalty under paragraph 5 (the greater of £300 or 5 per cent of the tax due); and a twelve-month tax-geared penalty under paragraph 6. The reasonable excuse defence sits in paragraph 23 and the special reduction power in paragraph 16. The 30-day appeal window is in paragraph 22, running from the date printed on the penalty notice. The HMRC postal address for CGT correspondence in the United Kingdom is Capital Gains Tax, HM Revenue and Customs, BX9 1AS.
The Upper Tribunal in Perrin v HMRC [2018] UKUT 0156 (TCC) settled the four-stage objective test for the reasonable excuse defence — facts asserted, objective assessment, date the excuse ceased, and remedy without unreasonable delay. The First-tier Tribunal in Christian Peter Candy v HMRC [2024] UKFTT 416 (TC) is the leading authority on the application of the Perrin test to the 60-day CGT regime — the Tribunal accepted that reliance on a regulated conveyancer or solicitor specifically engaged to attend to the post-completion CGT return could amount to a reasonable excuse, particularly where the regime was novel at the relevant time. The Upper Tribunal in HMRC v Hok Ltd [2012] UKUT 363 (TCC) confirms that the First-tier Tribunal has no general fairness jurisdiction over Schedule 55 penalties — the reasonable excuse defence and the special reduction power are the statutory routes.
What's Covered in This Template
Our United Kingdom CGT 60-day late filing penalty appeal template builds a structured letter HMRC can act on quickly — taxpayer identification, the property disposal and filing history, the penalty under appeal, the brief reasonable excuse, the Perrin four-stage analysis, the Christian Peter Candy adviser-reliance principle and the Schedule 55 special reduction and Martland late-appeal arguments.
HMRC CGT Postal Address (BX9 1AS)
Pre-fills the standard HMRC CGT correspondence address — Capital Gains Tax, HM Revenue and Customs, BX9 1AS, United Kingdom — used across the United Kingdom for CGT 60-day penalty appeals.
Auto-Calculated 30-Day Appeal Deadline
Calculates the 30-day appeal deadline under Schedule 55 paragraph 22 from the date of the HMRC penalty notice so the taxpayer can see at a glance whether the appeal is in time.
Auto-Calculated 60-Day Reporting Deadline
Calculates the statutory 60-day reporting deadline from the date of completion (not exchange) so the elapsed time between deadline and actual filing is clear on the face of the letter.
Five-Way Penalty-Type Switch
Auto-selects the correct statutory citation — Schedule 55 paragraph 3 (£100 fixed), paragraph 4 (£10/day daily), paragraph 5 (six-month tax-geared), paragraph 6 (twelve-month tax-geared) or combined.
Expert: Perrin Four-Stage Objective Test
Structures the reasonable excuse defence into the four stages required by Perrin v HMRC — facts asserted, objective assessment, date the excuse ceased and remedy without unreasonable delay.
Expert: Christian Peter Candy Adviser-Reliance Principle
Engages the leading 2024 First-tier Tribunal authority on adviser-reliance reasonable excuse in the 60-day CGT context — particularly where the retainer expressly named the post-completion return.
Expert: Penalty Quantum Review (Sch 55 paras 3-6 + Sch 56)
Breaks down the penalty under appeal by Schedule 55 paragraph, sets out the underlying tax due figure and any payment on account already made — narrowing the dispute and engaging the section 7B payment-on-account credit.
Expert: Martland Three-Stage Late-Appeal Test
Where this appeal is more than 30 days late, structures the Martland v HMRC [2018] UKUT 178 (TCC) test — length of delay, reasons for delay, all the circumstances including the underlying merits.
Expert: Special Reduction (Schedule 55 paragraph 16)
Independent HMRC discretion to reduce the penalty for special circumstances — first-time defaulter, modest tax-geared element, vulnerable taxpayer or other proportionality considerations under FA 2009 Schedule 55 paragraph 16.
Expert: Internal Review and FTT Escalation (form T240)
Signposts the right to an HMRC internal review under TMA 1970 section 49A and the right to escalate to the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) via form T240 to PO Box 16972, Birmingham B16 6TZ.
Single Signer — Taxpayer
The letter is signed by the United Kingdom Self Assessment taxpayer whose 60-day return is at issue. No witness or notarisation is required for an HMRC CGT 60-day penalty appeal.
How to Appeal a CGT 60-Day Late Filing Penalty
Follow these steps to produce a well-structured CGT 60-day penalty appeal letter in a format HMRC and (if escalated) the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) accept across the United Kingdom.
- 1
Check the 30-Day Appeal Deadline
Note the date printed on the HMRC penalty notice. The appeal must reach HMRC within 30 days of that date under Schedule 55 paragraph 22. The template auto-calculates the deadline once you enter the notice date.
- 2
Identify the Penalty Type
Pick the Schedule 55 paragraph the penalty falls under — paragraph 3 fixed £100, paragraph 4 daily £10, paragraph 5 six-month tax-geared, paragraph 6 twelve-month tax-geared, or combined. The template adjusts the statutory citation throughout the letter.
- 3
Confirm the Disposal and Filing Dates
The 60-day window runs from the date of completion (when legal title passes and the proceeds are released), not the date of exchange of contracts. The template auto-calculates the statutory deadline from the completion date.
- 4
Pick a Reasonable Excuse Category (Expert)
Seven recognised categories — serious illness; bereavement; professional adviser failure (Candy); IT failure of the HMRC CGT on UK Property Service; unfamiliarity with the novel regime (Candy); HMRC error; other unforeseen event. Each category drives a different statutory and caselaw framing.
- 5
Apply the Perrin Four-Stage Test (Expert)
Set out the facts asserted (stage 1); the objective assessment (stage 2); the date the excuse ceased (stage 3); and the remedy without unreasonable delay (stage 4). The four-stage framing is what HMRC and the First-tier Tribunal apply.
- 6
Engage the Candy Adviser-Reliance Principle (Expert)
Where a regulated conveyancer or solicitor was specifically engaged to attend to the post-completion 60-day return and failed, the Christian Peter Candy v HMRC principle applies directly. The strongest cases are where the retainer letter expressly named the 60-day return.
- 7
Add the Special Reduction Request (Expert)
Independent of the reasonable excuse defence, the Schedule 55 paragraph 16 special reduction power lets HMRC reduce the penalty for special circumstances — first-time defaulter, modest tax-geared element relative to the fixed-and-daily penalty, novelty of the regime.
- 8
Send to HMRC and Keep a Copy
Post to Capital Gains Tax, HM Revenue and Customs, BX9 1AS, United Kingdom — no street or city needed. Quote your UTR on every letter. Keep proof of postage. HMRC aim to respond within 45 days.
Why Doxuno documents are different
Four things that make our templates more thorough than AI-generated drafts and more current than static template libraries.
Always current
Always current with the law
Templates carrying statute references are continuously updated as the law changes. Your document always reflects the current legal framework.
Free PDF
Print-ready PDF
Free to download. Vector text, embedded fonts, statute citations baked in. Print, sign, file. Ready for any signing flow including electronic signature.
Word · .docx
Editable Word (.docx)
Continue editing in Word after download. Add custom clauses, reuse the template for similar agreements, or share with a colleague for collaborative review.
Requires Expert one-time unlock or any paid Doxuno subscription.
Legal Considerations — CGT 60-Day Late Filing Penalty Appeal
CGT 60-day penalty appeals are governed by United Kingdom direct tax statutes and HMRC published guidance. The framework operates the same in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.
This template is for general information and does not constitute legal or tax advice. TaxAid, Tax Help for Older People and Citizens Advice offer free guidance for individuals; the Chartered Institute of Taxation (CIOT), ACCA, ICAEW and STEP-regulated practitioners advise on complex estate, trust or property cases. The First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) has the final word on the reasonable excuse and special reduction defences.
Reviewed for the United Kingdom
Statutory Framework — Schedule 55 + Schedule 56
The 60-day reporting obligation sits in sections 13 and 14 and Schedule 2 of the Finance Act 2019 (as amended). Late filing penalties operate under Finance Act 2009 Schedule 55 — paragraph 3 (£100 fixed), paragraph 4 (£10 per day after 3 months, up to £900), paragraph 5 (greater of £300 or 5 per cent of tax due at 6 months) and paragraph 6 (greater of £300 or 5 per cent of tax due at 12 months). Late payment penalties operate under Schedule 56 — 5 per cent surcharges at 30 days, 6 months and 12 months. The reasonable excuse defence is in Schedule 55 paragraph 23 and the special reduction power is in paragraph 16. The 30-day appeal window is in paragraph 22.
Perrin v HMRC — Four-Stage Objective Test
The Upper Tribunal in Perrin v HMRC [2018] UKUT 0156 (TCC) settled the test for reasonable excuse across the Schedule 55 regime. The decision-maker must: (1) establish the facts the taxpayer asserts; (2) consider whether viewed objectively those facts amount to a reasonable excuse; (3) identify the date the reasonable excuse ceased; and (4) decide whether the taxpayer remedied the failure without unreasonable delay. The test is objective — the taxpayer's beliefs and conduct are judged by reference to a reasonable person in the same circumstances.
Christian Peter Candy v HMRC — Adviser-Reliance + Novel Regime
In Christian Peter Candy v HMRC [2024] UKFTT 416 (TC) the First-tier Tribunal accepted that, on the facts before it, reliance on a regulated conveyancer or solicitor specifically engaged for the property transaction itself could amount to a reasonable excuse for the failure to file a 60-day CGT return — particularly where the regime was novel at the relevant time and the taxpayer had instructed the adviser specifically to attend to the post-completion CGT reporting obligation. The case is the leading FTT authority on the application of the Perrin test to the 60-day CGT regime.
Special Reduction (Schedule 55 paragraph 16) and Hok
Independent of the reasonable excuse defence, Schedule 55 paragraph 16 allows HMRC to reduce a penalty where there are special circumstances. The Upper Tribunal in HMRC v Hok Ltd [2012] UKUT 363 (TCC) confirmed that the First-tier Tribunal has no general fairness jurisdiction — the statutory routes (reasonable excuse and special reduction) are the routes through which the appeal must run. Special circumstances must be more than the ordinary effects of complying with the 60-day regime and must apply uncommonly to the taxpayer.
Late Appeal — Martland Three-Stage Test
A late appeal can be admitted by HMRC where there is a good reason for the delay. Where HMRC refuses, the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) has a separate jurisdiction under rule 20 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Tax Chamber) Rules 2009 to admit the appeal in the interests of justice. The Tribunal applies the Martland v HMRC [2018] UKUT 178 (TCC) three-stage test — length of delay; reasons for delay; balancing exercise (including preliminary view on the underlying merits and prejudice to either party).
FTT Escalation via Form T240
Where HMRC declines the appeal, the taxpayer can ask for an HMRC internal review under TMA 1970 section 49A. If the review remains adverse, the appeal goes to the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) by way of form T240 to PO Box 16972, Birmingham B16 6TZ, within 30 days of the review conclusion letter (or 30 days of the original HMRC decision where no review was sought).
Frequently Asked Questions
Build Your CGT 60-Day Penalty Appeal
Produce a clear, statute-cited letter HMRC can act on quickly. Whether the penalty is the £100 fixed, the £10/day daily, the six-month or twelve-month tax-geared element, the template applies the Perrin four-stage objective test to your chosen reasonable excuse category, engages the Christian Peter Candy v HMRC [2024] adviser-reliance principle where relevant and signposts the special reduction request and FTT escalation route via form T240 to PO Box 16972, Birmingham B16 6TZ.
Free PDF · Editable Word with Expert · No account required