UK HMRC COP9 + CDF: 2026/27

UK HMRC COP9 + CDF Tax-Fraud Disclosure 2026/27: Step-by-Step

Q: What is the difference between COP8 and COP9?

COP8 (Code of Practice 8) : HMRC civil investigation where serious tax avoidance suspected but NO fraud. Often complex avoidance schemes (DOTAS-disclosed or otherwise marketed). Run by FIS or specialist counter-avoidance teams. Penalties via Schedule 24 (max 100% deliberate band) or DOTAS-specific penalties. COP9 (Code of Practice 9) : HMRC civil investigation where DELIBERATE TAX FRAUD suspected. Offers Contractual Disclosure Facility (CDF) - 60 days to admit fraud + start disclosure in exchange for prosecution immunity on disclosed conduct. If taxpayer rejects CDF or HMRC discovers undisclosed fraud later, criminal prosecution remains an option. Key practical difference : COP8 is "civil pressure on avoidance"; COP9 is "civil settlement OR criminal prosecution on fraud". COP9 carries much higher stakes - criminal conviction, prison (up to 7 years for cheating the public revenue / Section 106A TMA 1970 for false statements), unlimited fines + the tax + Schedule 24 penalties.

Q: What constitutes "tax fraud" for COP9 purposes?

Deliberate conduct that reduces tax liability through false statements or omissions . Key elements: (a) intent (mens rea) - not negligence or carelessness; (b) tax loss (or potential tax loss) to HMRC; (c) some form of dishonesty - false invoices, false expenses, undisclosed income, offshore structures designed to conceal beneficial ownership, false employment status declarations. Statutory framework : criminal cheating the public revenue (common law) - max 7 years prison + unlimited fine; Section 106A TMA 1970 (fraudulent evasion of income tax) - max 7 years; VATA 1994 Section 72 (fraudulent VAT) - max 7 years; Fraud Act 2006 (general fraud offences). Examples typically caught : undeclared overseas accounts, false expense claims, ghost employees, deliberately backdated documents, sham contractor arrangements, offshore disguised remuneration schemes (where settled / accepted as fraudulent). NOT fraud : aggressive but legal tax avoidance, mistakes despite reasonable care, technical errors in returns, disputes over law application.

Q: Can HMRC use Schedule 36 powers during COP9?

Yes - extensively . Schedule 36 FA 2008 information notices are HMRC's primary record-gathering tool during any investigation, including COP9. Powers : (a) Section 1 - tax payer notice (statutory power to require named taxpayer to produce documents / answer questions in writing); (b) Section 2 - third-party notice (require bank / accountant / employer to disclose, with First-tier Tribunal approval for non-cooperative third parties); (c) Section 17 - inspection of business premises (with 7 days' notice except urgent fraud cases); (d) Section 23 - copying and retaining records. Penalties for non-compliance : £300 initial + £60/day continuing under Section 39 (or daily penalty up to £1k once tribunal-approved). Limits : legal professional privilege protects solicitor-client communications; documents already provided don't need reproducing; documents not in taxpayer's possession or control are out of scope. Practical advice : respond carefully + on time. Late or incomplete responses are flagged. Get every response reviewed by specialist before submission.

Q: What if I receive a "nudge letter" not a formal investigation letter?

Nudge letters are HMRC's pre-enquiry communications: "we have information suggesting you may have undeclared X - please consider whether your return needs amending". Sent in waves to thousands of taxpayers based on HMRC's risk-scoring (Common Reporting Standard data from overseas banks, Land Registry data, Companies House data, gig-economy platform reports, payment provider reports). Common nudge campaigns : offshore accounts (CRS data), buy-to-let rental income (Land Registry), gig-economy income (Uber / Airbnb / Deliveroo reports), cryptocurrency disposals (exchange data), Companies House director income. Critical action : DO NOT ignore. DO take advice within days. Options: (a) confirm return is correct (only if absolutely sure); (b) amend return + use Worldwide Disclosure Facility / Let Property Campaign / Digital Disclosure Service for unprompted disclosure (penalty floor); (c) if behaviour was deliberate, consider voluntary CDF (taxpayer-initiated COP9). Ignoring nudge letters typically escalates to formal Section 9A enquiry or COP8 / COP9 within 6-12 months with significantly worse penalty position (prompted disclosure).

Q: Will HMRC prosecute even if I accept CDF?

Not on the disclosed conduct . The CDF Acceptance Letter contains HMRC's binding undertaking that the disclosed deliberate behaviour will not be prosecuted. This is the central feature of CDF. BUT - the undertaking has limits : (a) only covers behaviour ACCURATELY DISCLOSED in the Outline + Full Disclosure (omissions void the undertaking); (b) does not cover offences against third parties (e.g. money laundering offences under POCA 2002 may still be prosecuted by NCA / CPS); (c) does not cover future or continuing fraud; (d) does not cover other agencies' investigations (SFO for serious fraud, FCA for financial services offences, DWP for benefits, Companies House for director offences). Most COP9 settlements complete without prosecution - HMRC's interest is recovery + deterrence not punishment. Prosecution rare exceptions : false disclosure detected, undisclosed conduct discovered post-settlement, public interest factors (e.g. high-profile case used as deterrent), offshore evasion via structures attracting POCA s327 / s328 / s329 charges.

Q: How much does COP9 / CDF representation cost?

Specialist tax-investigations counsel £400-£800/hr (senior partner level); £200-£400/hr (associate / manager). Total cost for a complete COP9 settlement : £15k typical minimum, £50k-£200k mid-range, £500k+ for complex multi-jurisdictional cases. Includes: (a) initial advice + 60-day decision (£3-£10k); (b) Outline Disclosure preparation (£2-£8k); (c) Full Disclosure Report preparation (£10-£100k); (d) HMRC negotiations + settlement (£5-£50k); (e) forensic accounting / valuation experts if needed (£10-£100k). Funding : usually out of taxpayer's own funds. Professional fee protection insurance excludes COP9 by standard policy terms. Conditional fee arrangements rare in COP9 (specialists prefer hourly billing given complexity + duration). Compare to alternative : criminal prosecution defence is much more expensive (£100-£500k+) AND carries conviction + sentencing + ancillary orders (confiscation orders under POCA can be larger than the tax itself).

Deep-dive on HMRC Code of Practice 9 (COP9) and the Contractual Disclosure Facility (CDF) for 2026/27. 7-step CDF timeline from letter receipt to Contract Settlement. 60-day acceptance window mechanics. Outline Disclosure + Full Disclosure Report structure. Schedule 24 FA 2007 penalty bands (0-100%) and Schedule 24A FA 2010 offshore enhancements (up to 200%). 4/6/12/20-year discovery time limits under TMA 1970. Denial letter route + prosecution immunity scope. Schedule 36 FA 2008 information notices. Voluntary CDF disclosure strategy. Statute: Taxes Management Act 1970, Finance Act 2007 Schedule 24, Finance Act 2010 Schedule 10, Finance Act 2008 Schedule 36, Fraud Act 2006.

2026/27 COP9 / CDF at a glance

Acceptance window

60 days

From COP9 letter receipt

Max penalty

200%

Schedule 24A offshore Category 3

Discovery limit (deliberate)

20 years

Section 36(1A) TMA 1970

CDF benefit

No prosecution

On accurately disclosed conduct

7-step CDF timeline

Step 1
COP9 letter arrives
- Day 0

Hand-delivered or sent by named HMRC Fraud Investigation Service (FIS) officer. Cites Code of Practice 9 explicitly and offers the Contractual Disclosure Facility (CDF). The letter explains: HMRC suspects deliberate tax fraud; taxpayer has 60 days to either ACCEPT or REJECT the CDF offer. Do NOT respond immediately. Engage a specialist tax-investigations solicitor or accountant within days 1-3. Cost £400-£800/hr typical for senior specialists. Many offer free 30-minute initial consultations.
Step 2
60-day window: accept or reject
- Day 1 to Day 60

Accept CDF: sign Acceptance form admitting deliberate tax fraud in specified terms; HMRC gives written undertaking NOT to prosecute on the disclosed conduct (but no immunity on undisclosed matters or future fraud). Submit Outline Disclosure within 60 days. Reject CDF: HMRC retains option to prosecute. Civil investigation continues under COP9 anyway - taxpayer can still make a Denial Letter denying fraud (rare and high-risk). Default position: rejecting CDF without sound legal advice is almost always wrong. The CDF gives prosecution immunity in exchange for full disclosure - rejecting removes that protection.
Step 3
Outline Disclosure
- Day 60

Initial admission document submitted with Acceptance form. Must include: (a) brief description of the deliberate conduct (what tax was unpaid and why); (b) tax years affected; (c) approximate value of tax involved (best estimate, not final figure); (d) any persons / companies involved; (e) confirmation of intent to make Full Disclosure. Outline Disclosure is NOT a quantified return - it triggers HMRC to scope the formal investigation. Errors / understatement here can void the CDF protection.
Step 4
Scoping meeting + Full Disclosure preparation
- Month 2 to Month 6

HMRC opens dialogue on scope, methodology, records access. Schedule 36 information notices may follow. Taxpayer (with adviser) prepares Full Disclosure Report: detailed quantified statement of all unpaid tax + interest + relevant facts + supporting documentation. Typical report 30-200 pages plus schedules. Standard period covered: 20 years where fraud (per Section 36(1A) TMA 1970). Adviser fees typically £15k-£100k+ for the full preparation. HMRC may engage forensic accountants if disclosure is unclear.
Step 5
Full Disclosure Report submitted
- Month 6-12 typical

Complete report delivered with: tax computations, interest computations, statement of facts, statement of conduct, certificates of disclosure (one each for capital, income, assets, liabilities). Critical legal document - signed declarations create criminal liability if knowingly false. Often includes voluntary additional disclosures (matters not previously suspected by HMRC) - these can secure unprompted-disclosure penalty floor.
Step 6
HMRC review + counter-proposals
- Month 6 to Month 18

HMRC reviews Full Disclosure. May challenge specific numbers, request additional records, conduct interviews under caution (rare in COP9 since not criminal). Penalty band negotiation begins under Schedule 24 FA 2007 + Schedule 24A FA 2010 (offshore). Quality of cooperation, timing of disclosure (unprompted floor much better than prompted), telling, helping and giving access (THG factors) all weigh into final penalty %.
Step 7
Settlement: Contract Settlement
- Month 18-36

Final agreement crystallised as a Contract Settlement under TMA 1970 - tax + interest + penalty paid as a single sum. Time to Pay (TTP) arrangements available if liquidity tight. Signed by taxpayer + HMRC senior officer. Settles all years + taxes disclosed. NOT a discharge - HMRC retains right to pursue new matters discovered later. Failure to comply with Contract Settlement = potential criminal proceedings for separate offence.

Schedule 24 + 24A penalty bands

Behaviour category	Unprompted	Prompted	Notes
Reasonable care (no penalty)	0%	0%	Mistake despite reasonable care - no penalty under Schedule 24
Careless (failure to take reasonable care)	0%	15-30%	Unprompted disclosure starts at 0%, prompted at 15%
Deliberate (not concealed)	20-70%	35-70%	Deliberate non-disclosure but no further concealment steps
Deliberate and concealed	30-100%	50-100%	Fraud + active concealment (false documents, offshore secrecy etc)
Offshore Category 3 (Schedule 24A)	60-200%	100-200%	Offshore income from non-transparent jurisdiction - up to 200%

Penalty calculated as % of Potential Lost Revenue (PLR). Quality of cooperation - "telling, helping, giving access" (THG) - drives where in the band the final % lands. Max 30% reduction available from top of band for full cooperation. Voluntary disclosure (unprompted) is the single largest factor reducing penalty exposure.

Section 29 discovery assessment time limits

Behaviour	Years	Statute
No carelessness (mistake despite reasonable care)	4	Section 34 TMA 1970 (4-year discovery)
Careless	6	Section 36(1) TMA 1970 (6-year)
Offshore careless	12	Section 36A TMA 1970 (12-year offshore from April 2019)
Deliberate	20	Section 36(1A) TMA 1970 (20-year deliberate)

Years run from the END of the relevant tax year. The 20-year deliberate-behaviour limit is the standard COP9 scope - HMRC can typically reopen any tax year within the last 20 years if deliberate behaviour is established. Inheritance Tax has parallel limits (Section 240 IHTA 1984); VAT has parallel limits (VATA 1994 Section 73(6)).

Critical: do not respond without specialist advice

This guide is informational only - not legal advice. COP9 is the most serious civil tax procedure HMRC operates. The 60-day window is short, the documents are forensic, and consequences of error are severe (prosecution + unlimited fines + tax + penalties + ancillary orders under POCA 2002).

If you receive a COP9 letter: do not respond. Do not call the named officer. Do not destroy or alter documents. Within 3 working days engage a specialist tax-investigations solicitor or accountant. Suitable specialists are listed by the Chartered Institute of Taxation (CIOT), Law Society Find a Solicitor for "Tax investigations", and ICAEW's Tax Faculty. Many specialist firms (e.g. Pinsent Masons Tax Disputes, BDO Tax Investigations, Grant Thornton FIS) offer initial consultations.

For low-income taxpayers who cannot afford private representation: TaxAid (taxaid.org.uk) and LITRG (litrg.org.uk) provide free guidance. However for COP9 the technical complexity typically exceeds free-service capacity - try the Law Society for solicitors offering conditional fee arrangements.

Frequently asked questions

What is the difference between COP8 and COP9?

COP8 (Code of Practice 8): HMRC civil investigation where serious tax avoidance suspected but NO fraud. Often complex avoidance schemes (DOTAS-disclosed or otherwise marketed). Run by FIS or specialist counter-avoidance teams. Penalties via Schedule 24 (max 100% deliberate band) or DOTAS-specific penalties. COP9 (Code of Practice 9): HMRC civil investigation where DELIBERATE TAX FRAUD suspected. Offers Contractual Disclosure Facility (CDF) - 60 days to admit fraud + start disclosure in exchange for prosecution immunity on disclosed conduct. If taxpayer rejects CDF or HMRC discovers undisclosed fraud later, criminal prosecution remains an option. Key practical difference: COP8 is "civil pressure on avoidance"; COP9 is "civil settlement OR criminal prosecution on fraud". COP9 carries much higher stakes - criminal conviction, prison (up to 7 years for cheating the public revenue / Section 106A TMA 1970 for false statements), unlimited fines + the tax + Schedule 24 penalties.

Should I accept the CDF offer?

Almost always YES - but only with specialist legal advice within the 60-day window. Reasons to accept: (a) prosecution immunity on disclosed conduct (the single most valuable feature of CDF - HMRC formally undertakes not to prosecute); (b) penalty band of 20-100% under Schedule 24, vs unlimited criminal fines + conviction; (c) negotiated settlement preserves business continuity, professional licences, immigration status; (d) better penalty bands available via "telling, helping, giving" cooperation; (e) avoids reputational damage of public criminal trial. Reasons to reject (extremely rare): (a) absolute certainty no fraud occurred + willingness to fight HMRC's allegation; (b) the conduct doesn't actually meet legal threshold for tax fraud and a Denial Letter is appropriate. Critical: rejection means HMRC keeps prosecution option open - the trial process is brutal, expensive (£100k+ defence costs), and conviction rates favour HMRC. Get specialist advice before signing anything. The 60-day clock starts on receipt of letter; missing the deadline is treated as rejection.

What constitutes "tax fraud" for COP9 purposes?

Deliberate conduct that reduces tax liability through false statements or omissions. Key elements: (a) intent (mens rea) - not negligence or carelessness; (b) tax loss (or potential tax loss) to HMRC; (c) some form of dishonesty - false invoices, false expenses, undisclosed income, offshore structures designed to conceal beneficial ownership, false employment status declarations. Statutory framework: criminal cheating the public revenue (common law) - max 7 years prison + unlimited fine; Section 106A TMA 1970 (fraudulent evasion of income tax) - max 7 years; VATA 1994 Section 72 (fraudulent VAT) - max 7 years; Fraud Act 2006 (general fraud offences). Examples typically caught: undeclared overseas accounts, false expense claims, ghost employees, deliberately backdated documents, sham contractor arrangements, offshore disguised remuneration schemes (where settled / accepted as fraudulent). NOT fraud: aggressive but legal tax avoidance, mistakes despite reasonable care, technical errors in returns, disputes over law application.

What is "denial letter" route and when does it apply?

Alternative to accepting CDF. Taxpayer formally denies fraud allegation. Process: within 60 days, submit Denial Letter stating no deliberate behaviour occurred + reasons. HMRC then EITHER (a) drops fraud allegation + continues investigation as standard COP8 or aspect enquiry, OR (b) maintains fraud allegation + can refer to Criminal Investigation. Risks of Denial Letter: (a) loses CDF prosecution immunity; (b) if HMRC later proves deliberate behaviour, courts treat denial as aggravating factor on penalty + sentence; (c) Section 144 Finance Act 2008 (penalty for false declarations) can apply to the denial itself. When appropriate: genuine factual misunderstanding by HMRC, false witness allegations, mistaken identity (someone else committed the fraud HMRC attributes to taxpayer), facts that genuinely fall short of the deliberate threshold. Always with specialist counsel. The denial letter wording is forensically scrutinised and one of the most consequential documents in UK tax procedure.

How are Schedule 24 penalties calculated?

Penalties are a % of "Potential Lost Revenue" (PLR) - the tax that would have been lost. Three behavioural categories: (1) Careless 0-30% (failure to take reasonable care, e.g. forgot to declare a small source); (2) Deliberate not concealed 20-70% (intentional non-disclosure but no further cover-up); (3) Deliberate and concealed 30-100% (fraud + active concealment - false invoices, sham trusts, etc). Disclosure factor: unprompted disclosure (taxpayer initiated before HMRC enquiry) gets penalty FLOOR; prompted disclosure (HMRC already opened enquiry) gets higher penalty. THG factors (telling, helping, giving): quality of cooperation determines where in the band: telling (full + honest information), helping (active assistance with HMRC's work), giving (full access to records). Max 30% reduction available from top of band. Offshore Category 3 (Sch 24A): 200% maximum where income from non-transparent jurisdiction (no automatic information exchange) - effectively doubles the standard penalty.

What is the discovery time limit for tax assessment?

HMRC's right to raise discovery assessments (Section 29 TMA 1970) under Section 34 + 36 TMA 1970 + Section 36A (offshore). 4 years: no carelessness, mistake despite reasonable care (Section 34 TMA 1970). 6 years: carelessness (Section 36(1) TMA 1970). 12 years: offshore careless errors (Section 36A TMA 1970, from April 2019 - applies to relevant offshore income, gains, or assets from non-transparent jurisdictions). 20 years: deliberate behaviour (Section 36(1A) TMA 1970) - the typical CDF / COP9 scope. Time runs from the end of the tax year: e.g. 20-year limit for 2025/26 tax year runs from 5 April 2026 to 5 April 2046. Inheritance Tax discovery: Section 240 IHTA 1984 - 6 years standard, 20 years deliberate. VAT: VATA 1994 Section 73(6) - 4 years standard, 20 years dishonest evasion.

Can HMRC use Schedule 36 powers during COP9?

Yes - extensively. Schedule 36 FA 2008 information notices are HMRC's primary record-gathering tool during any investigation, including COP9. Powers: (a) Section 1 - tax payer notice (statutory power to require named taxpayer to produce documents / answer questions in writing); (b) Section 2 - third-party notice (require bank / accountant / employer to disclose, with First-tier Tribunal approval for non-cooperative third parties); (c) Section 17 - inspection of business premises (with 7 days' notice except urgent fraud cases); (d) Section 23 - copying and retaining records. Penalties for non-compliance: £300 initial + £60/day continuing under Section 39 (or daily penalty up to £1k once tribunal-approved). Limits: legal professional privilege protects solicitor-client communications; documents already provided don't need reproducing; documents not in taxpayer's possession or control are out of scope. Practical advice: respond carefully + on time. Late or incomplete responses are flagged. Get every response reviewed by specialist before submission.

What if I receive a "nudge letter" not a formal investigation letter?

Nudge letters are HMRC's pre-enquiry communications: "we have information suggesting you may have undeclared X - please consider whether your return needs amending". Sent in waves to thousands of taxpayers based on HMRC's risk-scoring (Common Reporting Standard data from overseas banks, Land Registry data, Companies House data, gig-economy platform reports, payment provider reports). Common nudge campaigns: offshore accounts (CRS data), buy-to-let rental income (Land Registry), gig-economy income (Uber / Airbnb / Deliveroo reports), cryptocurrency disposals (exchange data), Companies House director income. Critical action: DO NOT ignore. DO take advice within days. Options: (a) confirm return is correct (only if absolutely sure); (b) amend return + use Worldwide Disclosure Facility / Let Property Campaign / Digital Disclosure Service for unprompted disclosure (penalty floor); (c) if behaviour was deliberate, consider voluntary CDF (taxpayer-initiated COP9). Ignoring nudge letters typically escalates to formal Section 9A enquiry or COP8 / COP9 within 6-12 months with significantly worse penalty position (prompted disclosure).

Will HMRC prosecute even if I accept CDF?

Not on the disclosed conduct. The CDF Acceptance Letter contains HMRC's binding undertaking that the disclosed deliberate behaviour will not be prosecuted. This is the central feature of CDF. BUT - the undertaking has limits: (a) only covers behaviour ACCURATELY DISCLOSED in the Outline + Full Disclosure (omissions void the undertaking); (b) does not cover offences against third parties (e.g. money laundering offences under POCA 2002 may still be prosecuted by NCA / CPS); (c) does not cover future or continuing fraud; (d) does not cover other agencies' investigations (SFO for serious fraud, FCA for financial services offences, DWP for benefits, Companies House for director offences). Most COP9 settlements complete without prosecution - HMRC's interest is recovery + deterrence not punishment. Prosecution rare exceptions: false disclosure detected, undisclosed conduct discovered post-settlement, public interest factors (e.g. high-profile case used as deterrent), offshore evasion via structures attracting POCA s327 / s328 / s329 charges.

How much does COP9 / CDF representation cost?

Specialist tax-investigations counsel £400-£800/hr (senior partner level); £200-£400/hr (associate / manager). Total cost for a complete COP9 settlement: £15k typical minimum, £50k-£200k mid-range, £500k+ for complex multi-jurisdictional cases. Includes: (a) initial advice + 60-day decision (£3-£10k); (b) Outline Disclosure preparation (£2-£8k); (c) Full Disclosure Report preparation (£10-£100k); (d) HMRC negotiations + settlement (£5-£50k); (e) forensic accounting / valuation experts if needed (£10-£100k). Funding: usually out of taxpayer's own funds. Professional fee protection insurance excludes COP9 by standard policy terms. Conditional fee arrangements rare in COP9 (specialists prefer hourly billing given complexity + duration). Compare to alternative: criminal prosecution defence is much more expensive (£100-£500k+) AND carries conviction + sentencing + ancillary orders (confiscation orders under POCA can be larger than the tax itself).

Can I make a voluntary COP9 disclosure (taxpayer-initiated)?

Yes - and strongly recommended if deliberate behaviour occurred + you fear HMRC discovery. Mechanism: write to HMRC's Code of Practice 9 mailbox ([email protected]) requesting CDF be opened. HMRC issues formal COP9 letter, taxpayer accepts CDF. Penalty advantages: unprompted disclosure floor (20% deliberate band, vs 35% prompted = potential 15pp saving) + maximum quality cooperation factors. Combined with full disclosure that includes years HMRC didn't suspect: can secure significantly better penalty position than waiting to be discovered. Alternative disclosure facilities (if not certain fraud occurred): (a) Worldwide Disclosure Facility (WDF) - offshore income / gains, penalty 30%-200% Sch 24A; (b) Let Property Campaign - undeclared rental income, penalty 0-30% careless or 20-100% deliberate; (c) Digital Disclosure Service - any unreported tax, ad-hoc. Strategy: with specialist advice, choose facility that matches actual conduct - misclassifying as careless when actually deliberate can void protection if HMRC discovers later. CDF is reserved for clear fraud cases.

What happens if I don't respond to the COP9 letter within 60 days?

Treated as rejection of the CDF offer. HMRC retains the right to prosecute - the prosecution immunity that CDF would have provided is gone. The civil investigation continues regardless under COP9 / COP8 procedures, with additional powers under Schedule 36 + Section 29 TMA 1970. Practical implications: HMRC interprets non-response as either (a) inability to engage (e.g. taxpayer unaware) or (b) deliberate avoidance of CDF (intent to obstruct). The latter is treated as aggravating - the case is more likely to be referred to Criminal Investigation Directorate. If the 60 days are nearly up: an immediate formal acknowledgement letter (drafted by specialist) requesting an extension is sometimes granted in exceptional circumstances (medical incapacity, taxpayer abroad and unaware). HMRC will not grant extensions to give more time to consider - the 60 days is the consideration period. If 60 days has already passed: a "late acceptance" approach can sometimes be negotiated but with weaker terms. Best outcome where genuine reasons for late response exist. Do not wait until day 59 - aim to respond by day 30-45 with the substantive Acceptance or Denial.