MTD ITSA delayed for two years
The government has announced a further delay to the introduction of Making Tax Digital for Income Tax Self-Assessment (MTD ITSA). Why and what's the new timeframe?

In a statement released on 19 December, the government has finally acknowledged that MTD ITSA is a significant change for all concerned, and that launching during an economic crisis is not ideal. MTD ITSA will now be delayed until April 2026, with the self-employed and landlords with turnover in excess of £50,000 joining first. Those with income over £30,000 but not exceeding £50,000 will not need to join until April 2027. A start date for general partnerships has not yet been announced.
The government will now review the needs of smaller businesses before asking those earning less than £30,000 to join. Previously MTD ITSA was going to be mandatory for the self-employed/landlords earning over £10,000. Given the expected additional costs and administrative burden for small businesses this will undoubtedly be a very welcome change. However, HMRC will have its work cut out when operating different systems for self-assessment customers so further delays could be on the cards.
Note. This does not affect the move to tax year basis periods, which will be effective from 2024/25 after next year’s transition.
Related Topics
-
Capital gains tax break for job-related accommodation
You’re in the process of selling a property that you bought as your home but because of your job have never lived in. You’ve been told that you’ll have to pay tax on any gain you make, but might a special relief get you off the hook?
-
Should you revoke your 20-year-old option?
Your business has let out a building to a tenant and it is now just over 20 years since you opted to tax the property with HMRC. Should you revoke it so that your tenant no longer needs to pay VAT?
-
Chip shop owner fined £40k for hiring illegal worker
A Surrey fish and chip shop owner has been left in shock after being fined £40,000 for allegedly employing someone who didn’t have the right to work in the UK, even though he conducted a right to work check. Where did this employer go wrong and what can you learn from it?