How we supported Midbass Distribution Limited through a seven-month HMRC review — and came out with full acceptance in both years.
Midbass Distribution Limited had two consecutive years’ R&D tax relief claims opened for compliance check under HMRC’s high-volume SME unit — the team set up in 2022 to process large numbers of R&D checks, where a case can be picked up at any stage by whichever caseworker has capacity, rather than staying with one inspector throughout.
That structure shaped how this case ran. Over roughly seven months, Midbass received several rounds of ‘further information’ requests that, on close reading, were substantially the same questions already answered — sometimes rephrased, sometimes asking for the same evidence in a different format. It’s a known feature of how that HMRC unit operates, and it’s the main reason a technically sound claim can still become a long, repetitive process.
What we did
- Consolidated the evidence into a single, consistent narrative — restating the technological uncertainties behind Midbass’s embedded electronics development in plain language for a non-specialist reader, alongside the more technical detail requested by HMRC’s schedule, so the same story held up whichever way the next question was framed.
- Built a stage-by-stage project timeline that tied each phase of the work to the specific uncertainty it addressed and the people involved — so that when HMRC’s later letters asked for ‘more detail’ on timing or attribution, the answer was already fully evidenced and simply needed to be presented again.
- Addressed a genuine, minor costing error head-on. A utility-cost apportionment figure in one year’s claim had been based on provisional supplier billing, which the accountants later corrected. We identified it, recalculated it transparently, and disclosed it in the response rather than waiting for HMRC to find it.
The outcome
HMRC closed the check with no adjustment to Midbass’s R&D position in either year — a full acceptance that the projects met the definition of qualifying R&D and that the associated staffing, externally provided worker, and consumables costs were eligible. The one costing correction that did apply resulted in a negligible adjustment, and HMRC confirmed no penalty was due, accepting it as an error despite reasonable care having been taken.
A word from the client
“The questions HMRC kept sending felt repetitive and, frankly, unreasonable at times — but John had seen it all before and knew exactly how to respond. He kept us focused on what mattered and saw it through to a clean result. I don’t think many people could have handled it as well as he did.”
— Chris Etheridge, Midbass Distribution Limited
If your claim is technically sound, they deserve an adviser who will defend it as thoroughly as it was prepared. If you are facing a compliance check — or a claim you’re unsure was given the attention it needed elsewhere — get in touch, and we’ll take a proper look.