December 10, 2023 | 2 min read

“These are not the tax advocates you are looking for”

Author: Andy Wood

DALL·E 2024-05-22 14.06.10 - Create an image in a detailed, semi-realistic style inspired by the previously provided examples. The scene should depict two droids acting as legal c

In a tax tribunal, far, far away

Felicity Harber, an unrepresented taxpayer or Litigant in Person, lost her appeal at the First Tier Tribunal (FTT) after submitting nine fabricated tax rulings generated by Artificial Intelligence (AI) to support her case.

Although the details of her case seem almost irrelevant:

  • Harber disputed a £3,265.11 demand from HMRC for unpaid capital gains tax arising from a property sale.
  • She claimed a “reasonable excuse” for failing to notify HMRC, citing mental health issues and ignorance of the law.

In support of her claim, Harber presented nine summaries of FTT decisions, allegedly demonstrating successful appeals based on similar grounds.

Your Jedi mind tricks don’t work on me

However, when submitted to scrutiny, the FTT discovered that all nine rulings were entirely fabricated and had been generated by an AI tool similar to ChatGPT.

None of the cases existed in the FTT website or other legal databases, quickly raising suspicion as to their providence.

Further examination revealed inconsistencies, such as incorrect dates, irrelevant issues, and repeated phrases, confirming their artificial origin.

Although initially claiming ignorance of the AI’s involvement, Harber later acknowledged the possibility that she had used AI in her submissions, but downplayed its significance.

She argued that genuine cases supporting her position must exist, regardless of the fabricated ones!

The farce is strong with this one.

The Tribunal strikes back

The FTT rejected Harber’s appeal, finding her “reasonable excuse” claims insufficient.

The tribunal also emphasised the seriousness of using the fabricated AI authorities in her submissions.

Although suggesting that the problem was perhaps less significant in tax appeals than other litigations, the implications highlighted included wasted resources and potential damage to the legal system’s reputation.

Conclusion

The lesson is pretty simple. Don’t rely on AI to generate your legal submissions. It is probably on the list just behind don’t set off fireworks in the house…

… or let the Wookie win.