What an FTA query actually is
An information request is not an accusation. It usually means something in a return did not match a pattern — a refund position without an obvious cause, input tax high relative to output tax, zero-rated supplies without evident export activity, or an absence of reverse charge entries in a business with clear overseas costs.
Most queries resolve on documentation. The business explains the position, produces the supporting records, and the matter closes.
What turns a short exchange into a long one is almost never the underlying facts. It is a response that answers a different question, arrives incomplete, contradicts something already filed, or volunteers a position nobody asked about. The preparation is where the outcome is determined.
Who this is for
Businesses that have received an information request, notice of audit, or assessment. Businesses with a refund claim under examination. Businesses in a dispute over a penalty or an assessment.
Also businesses that want a clarification — a formal view on how a rule applies to their specific facts — and businesses that have identified an issue themselves and want the disclosure and any consequent correspondence handled together rather than separately.
What the work involves
How we run it:
- Establish the position before responding. What was filed, what supports it, and whether it is right. Responding before knowing is how businesses commit to a position they later have to retreat from.
- Identify what is actually being asked. Requests are frequently narrower than they appear, and answering more broadly than asked introduces issues that were not in scope.
- Assemble the evidence in a form that answers the question directly, indexed and referenced rather than sent as a bundle.
- Tell you where the position is weak, before rather than after — because that determines whether the right route is to defend, to disclose, or to settle.
- Prepare the response, consistent with everything previously filed and confined to what was asked.
- Handle the correspondence as your registered agent, including follow-up requests.
- Manage a field audit where one occurs: a single point of contact, controlled document flow, and staff briefed on what to do when asked something directly.
- Deal with the outcome — assessment, penalty, reconsideration or closure — and fix whatever process produced the issue.
How to respond, and how not to
The difference between a well-handled query and a badly handled one is almost entirely procedural:
- Answer what was asked — no more. Volunteering adjacent information opens matters that were not in scope
- Be consistent with what you have filed. A response contradicting a return raises a larger question than the original one
- Meet the deadline, or request an extension before it rather than after
- Index and reference the evidence so it can be followed. An unsorted bundle invites more questions
- Do not speculate. If you do not know, say you will confirm, and then confirm
- Do not concede in passing. Informal acknowledgements in correspondence are difficult to walk back
- Keep one channel. Multiple people responding produces inconsistency, and inconsistency is what gets pursued
The most damaging single error is answering quickly to seem cooperative, before establishing whether the filed position is actually correct. Cooperation is valuable; a rushed answer that has to be corrected is not.
Where representation genuinely changes things
We are not going to claim that representation changes the law or that we have influence. Neither is true, and firms suggesting otherwise are selling something else.
What representation does is more mundane and more useful. It puts someone between the authority and the business who has seen the process before, knows what a request is likely driving at, understands what evidence answers it, and is not emotionally invested in the outcome. It stops the panicked over-disclosure that turns a narrow query broad. It ensures the response is consistent with prior filings, which an internal team under pressure frequently cannot verify quickly.
And it means the awkward assessment — that the filed position was wrong, and the right route is disclosure rather than defence — gets made early, when it is still worth something.
What goes wrong
These are the failures we are brought in to correct, in rough order of frequency:
- Responding before establishing whether the filed position is right, and committing to something that has to be retreated from.
- Answering more than was asked, expanding the scope of the enquiry.
- Missing a deadline rather than requesting an extension before it.
- Sending an unsorted bundle, which generates further questions rather than closing them.
- Inconsistency with prior filings, which is what invites escalation.
- Several people corresponding, producing contradictions.
- Defending a position that is wrong, when disclosure would have been the better route and the window for it is closing.
- Treating a routine information request as a crisis, which produces exactly the over-disclosure that creates one.
When this needs to happen
As soon as anything is received. Response deadlines are firm, and the first response frames everything that follows — it is much easier to build from a well-prepared first response than to correct a hasty one.
Where you have identified an issue yourself and expect it to surface, act before it does. A voluntary disclosure made before a query, and correspondence handled in that sequence, is a materially different position from the same facts emerging in an audit.
What you end up with
- An assessment of the filed position before any response is made
- An honest view of where the position is strong and where it is not
- Evidence assembled, indexed and referenced to the question asked
- The response prepared and submitted within the deadline
- Correspondence handled through to closure as your registered agent
- Field audit managed through a single point of contact
- A process recommendation so the same issue does not recur
What we need from you
To start, we need:
- The correspondence received, in full
- The returns for the periods in question
- The records supporting the filed position
- Any prior correspondence with the FTA on the same or related matters
- An account of the underlying transactions
- Details of any related issues you are already aware of
- Authorisation for us to act as your tax agent
What it costs
The initial assessment is a fixed fee and includes our view of the position, which is the part worth having even if you handle the response yourself.
Ongoing representation is quoted based on the scope of the enquiry. A single information request on a defined point is a small engagement; a full audit across several periods is not. We do not price on contingency, which would give us an interest in disputing rather than in resolving.
Related
Frequently Asked Questions
What is a tax agent and why does it matter?
A tax agent is registered with the Federal Tax Authority and can act for a business in its dealings with the authority — audits, information requests, clarifications, reconsiderations. Many firms advise on tax; fewer can represent you in correspondence with the FTA.
We received an information request. What should we do first?
Establish whether the filed position is actually right, before responding. Answering quickly to seem cooperative, before you know, is the most damaging single error — because a rushed answer that has to be corrected is worse than a considered one submitted within the deadline.
Does a query mean we have done something wrong?
Usually not. It generally means something in a return did not match a pattern — a refund position without an obvious cause, high input tax relative to output tax, or no reverse charge entries in a business with obvious overseas costs. Most queries resolve on documentation.
Can you make a penalty go away?
No, and nobody can promise that. What representation does is ensure the response is prepared properly, consistent with prior filings, confined to what was asked, and submitted on time — and that where the position is genuinely weak, that is recognised early enough for disclosure to still be the better route.
What happens in a field audit?
The authority examines records on site or remotely across selected periods. What matters operationally is a single point of contact, controlled document flow, and staff briefed on what to do if asked something directly — which is to route it rather than answer from memory.
Should we volunteer information we think they might want?
No. Answer what was asked. Volunteering adjacent information expands the scope of the enquiry into areas that were not being examined, and it is one of the most common ways a narrow query becomes a broad one.
We found a problem ourselves. Should we wait to see if they find it?
No. A voluntary disclosure made before a query is a materially different position from the same facts emerging in an audit. Where you expect an issue to surface, dealing with it first and handling the correspondence in that sequence is almost always better.
Send us the correspondence before you reply. The first response frames everything that follows, and it is far easier to build from a good one than to correct a hasty one.
Check my compliance status 058 101 9570
Last reviewed 27 July 2026. Rates, thresholds and deadlines change — the e-invoicing provider deadline has already moved once. Confirm current requirements with the Federal Tax Authority before acting, or ask us to check your position.