It is understood that the bill, thought to be at least £5m, is down to the fact a number of its defined income plans were not properly incorporated in Luxembourg five years ago. The plans were sold through Isas and as they were not incoporated properly HMRC demanded the tax due.
HMRC is understood to have concluded that as investors went into the plans in good faith they should not pay the bill and instead it should land with Keydata.
PricewaterhouseCoopers has since revealed that a number of Keydata products may not comply with Isa regulations. These include the secure income bonds issues 1-3 and the defined income plans 1-8.
The administrator says that liabilities arising due to non-compliance issues associated with these products is one of the factors which has led to the application by the FSA for the appointment of administrators.
HMRC was in talks with Keydata regarding the bill when it is understood that the FSA halted negotiations and forced the firm into administration on the grounds of insolvency.
A source close to Keydata told Money Marketing yesterday that the firm offered the FSA an alternative route which was rejected.
Keydata was unavailable for comment.