Copy article

Sales Suppression Penalties: The 30 Days HMRC's New Factsheet Omits

ended 26. August 2026

A business can be fined up to £1,000 for possession of an electronic sales suppression tool, meaning one whose main function, or one of its main functions, is to suppress electronic sales records. Daily penalties of up to £75 can follow, which the legislation caps at £50,000. A new factsheet on that penalty, published on 25 August 2026, says HMRC may charge it “even if you didn't use it”.

When HMRC first suspects possession it writes, telling the business to remove the tool and “satisfy us” it has gone, then charges the fixed penalty if it is not satisfied. Finance Act 2022, which created the penalty, gives 30 days beginning with the day the notice is given, and HMRC's Compliance Handbook tells officers to instruct removal within 30 days of the letter's date. The factsheet gives no such deadline, and its only 30 days is the window to disagree with a decision, not to remove the tool. An ESS penalty in the past 5 years means no letter and no window.

The factsheet's section on when HMRC will not charge a penalty names only satisfying HMRC and a criminal conviction, not the unawareness rule in the Act.

  1. The factsheet explains in detail how this penalty is charged, but not the 30 days that stop it for a business with no ESS penalty in the past 5 years. Is that a fair division of labour between a taxpayer factsheet and an internal manual, or a document that tells a business half of what it needs?
  2. Liability does not arise where a person satisfies HMRC or, on appeal, the tribunal that they were unaware it was a suppression tool. Who is most likely to need that, and how would they ever learn it exists if the factsheet is the only thing they read?
  3. What should HMRC add to the factsheet, and what should a business do on the day a letter like that lands? Do you have a client who has had to prove to HMRC that something was removed from their systems? If so, please give as much colour and detail as possible.

2 responses from the Newspage community

Copy all

Star Quote
Copy

Editor
Harvey Dhillon
Founder & CEO at Zmartly
HMRC does publish the 30 days that stop this penalty, but only in the manual its officers read, not the factsheet the business reads. That isn't a fair division of labour, it's a document that tells a business half of what it needs. The Act gives a business 30 days to satisfy HMRC it no longer has the tool or access to it, the first time HMRC thinks it has one. The other rule isn't in any current HMRC guidance: you aren't liable if you satisfy HMRC, or the tribunal on appeal, that you didn't know it was a suppression tool. It matters most to someone who never installed anything, since possession covers a tool you don't own or can only reach remotely. They wouldn't learn it from HMRC's own page on disclosing till misuse, which still links to the old factsheet it withdrew this year. Put both rules in the factsheet, fix that link, and if that letter lands, remove the tool that day and say so in writing. Under the Act daily penalties only run for days you still have the tool.
Copy

Editor
Nouran Moustafa
Practice Principal & IFA at Roxton Wealth
This is exactly the kind of HMRC guidance that makes me nervous. If the law gives a business 30 days to remove the tool and avoid the penalty, that deadline should be impossible to miss. Hiding the useful bit in an internal manual while the public factsheet focuses on the punishment is backwards.

The “even if you didn’t use it” wording is particularly harsh because possession can include simply having access. That makes the unawareness defence incredibly important yet the factsheet barely helps the business understand it exists.

If that letter lands, do not shove it in a drawer. Work out immediately what software or access HMRC is referring to, remove it if appropriate, preserve evidence, respond in writing and get specialist tax advice.

My issue is not HMRC going after deliberate sales suppression. It absolutely should. My issue is that when penalties can reach £50,000+, the guidance should explain the escape route as clearly as the punishment.