This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. To find out more about cookies on this website and how to delete cookies, see our privacy notice.

Claims were incorrectly based on increased salaries

By Mark McLaughlin, October 2025

A statement by the Chancellor of the Exchequer when the coronavirus job retention scheme (CJRS) was introduced, about employers being able to “top up” workers’ salaries if they wished, did not mean that the employer could claim CJRS based on increased salaries, and the Coronavirus Directions did not allow the appellant company to do so.  

The appellant company (DPL) provided electrical services through its director (DL). DPL also employed an administrator (Ms G). In the period prior to March 2020, DL had been paid £100 per week, and Ms G was paid £191.23 per week. On 11 April 2020, DPL increased their salaries, so DL was now earning £576.93 per week, and Ms G was now earning £239.04 per week. DPL made 15 claims under the coronavirus job retention scheme (CJRS) for the period covering March 2020 to June 2021, based on the higher salaries. Following a compliance check into DPL’s CJRS claims, HM Revenue and

Subscribe to the McLaughlin’s Tax Case Library to get instant access
to the Tax Case Library.
14 day free trial , 90 day money back guarantee
Subscribe

Related or similar articles

Share buybacks did not necessarily constitute a main purpose of obtaining an income tax advantage for transactions in securities purposes
By Mark McLaughlin, August 2025
Salary sacrifice was binding contractually and subsistence payments were round sum allowances
By Mark McLaughlin, February 2025
The later of two interim dividends was due and payable when it was paid
By Arthur Weller, December 2024
Discovery assessments issued to taxpayer were not protected assessments
By Mark McLaughlin, February 2024
Release of overdrawn directors’ loan account occurred upon execution of a settlement agreement
By Mark McLaughlin, May 2023