Improve electronic tax code auditing

Issue

When a payroll company has been set up with electronic updates enabled but automatic application not enabled, the expectation is that the administrators of that payroll are responsible for which codes are applied and when.

However, if an action is taken by an administrator in this way, the audit log captures (where "apply" is selected) the action as if it was applied by HMRC rather than the administrative user who approved the tax notice.

Additionally, if the tax notice is instead rejected by the administrator, then we do not log that rejection and the notice is fully deleted from the database, which then becomes impossible to trace if you're comparing an employees tax history in Paycircle with the history in the HMRC portal.

Impact

• Inaccurate auditing for manually processed electronic tax code notices.

• Confusion where a tax code notice goes "missing" due to rejection.

• Increased difficulty tracing why an incorrect tax code is active.

Solution(s)

1. Increase audit verbosity to actively show that the notice was from HMRC and was applied by X administrator (where X = administrator name).

2. Ensure we log accept and reject actions on tax code notices, to ensure that a full audit history of notices from HMRC is present and can be accounted for.