Show Search Form

Search Results

registered interest	true false
date	exactly: or between: and
answering body
answering dept id
answering dept short name
answering dept sort name
hansard heading
house id
legislature	pref label
question text
tabling member constituency
tabling member printed
uin
answer	is ministerial correction true false date of answer exactly: or between: and answer text answering member constituency answering member printed grouped question UIN question first answered answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

1001954

	registered interest
	date	05/11/2018
	answering body	Treasury
	answering dept id	14
	answering dept short name	Treasury
	answering dept sort name	Treasury
	hansard heading	Tax Avoidance
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment he has made of the effect of the 2019 Loan Charge on individuals that had made financial plans on the basis of previous arrangements; and what support he is able to provide to those individuals.
	tabling member constituency	Lewisham East
	tabling member printed	Janet Daby
	uin	188241
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 16/11/2018 answer text <p>The charge on disguised remuneration (DR) loans is targeted at artificial tax avoidance schemes where earnings were paid in the form of loans, often made by an offshore third party. These loans are not repaid in practice and so are no different to ordinary income and are, and always have been, taxable.</p><p> </p><p>It is unfair to ordinary taxpayers to let anybody continue to benefit from contrived tax avoidance of this sort, and that is why this government has taken action to ensure that everybody pays the taxes they owe. The charge, announced at Budget 2016, will arise on 5 April 2019. By then affected users will have had three years to organise their financial affairs.</p><p> </p><p>The Government recognises the charge on DR loans will have a significant impact on some individuals who have used DR schemes, particularly those who used them to avoid the most tax.</p><p> </p><p>HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) are working to help people put things right. HMRC have published a simplified process for DR scheme users to spread payment of the tax they owe over 5 years if their current income is less than £50,000, and they are no longer in avoidance. Those with higher incomes or who need to pay over a longer period can also request extended payment periods, which will be tailored to individual circumstances. Anyone who is worried about being able to pay what they owe should contact HMRC as soon as possible.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency Central Devon answering member printed Mel Stride question first answered 16/11/2018 14:52:58 answering member 3935 label Biography information for Mel Stride
	tabling member	4698 label Biography information for Janet Daby

1007007

	registered interest
	date	14/11/2018
	answering body	Treasury
	answering dept id	14
	answering dept short name	Treasury
	answering dept sort name	Treasury
	hansard heading	Tax Avoidance
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, how much revenue has accrued to the public purse since 2011 from preventing individuals and companies using accounting derecognition rules in relation to loans and derivatives to avoid paying corporation tax.
	tabling member constituency	Bootle
	tabling member printed	Peter Dowd
	uin	191458
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/11/2018 answer text <p>Legislation was introduced with effect from 6 December 2010 to address avoidance schemes under which profits were said to fall out of account, or tax relief for losses were claimed, as a result of the way in which financial assets were recognised in accounts. Since that date, existing schemes have been unwound and there have been no further known iterations of these schemes. The measure has therefore been successful in protecting revenues, but it is not possible to say how much would otherwise have been lost.</p> answering member constituency Central Devon answering member printed Mel Stride question first answered 19/11/2018 15:35:42 answering member 3935 label Biography information for Mel Stride
	tabling member	4397 label Biography information for Peter Dowd

1007010

	registered interest
	date	14/11/2018
	answering body	Treasury
	answering dept id	14
	answering dept short name	Treasury
	answering dept sort name	Treasury
	hansard heading	Tax Avoidance
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, how much revenue has accrued to the public purse since 2011 through the prevention of tax avoidance resulting from the creation for corporate investors of a credit for UK tax where no tax has been paid.
	tabling member constituency	Bootle
	tabling member printed	Peter Dowd
	uin	191459
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/11/2018 answer text <p>Legislation was introduced with effect from 27 February 2012 to address a tax avoidance scheme which sought to obtain tax credits for a corporate investor in relation to distributions made by an Authorised Investment Fund where no underlying tax had in fact been suffered. Separately, legislation was introduced with effect from 15 September 2011 to address tax avoidance which sought to obtain a tax advantage in relation to manufactured overseas dividends, involving claims to repay or set-off withholding tax which had not actually been suffered.</p><p> </p><p>Since these measures were introduced, there have been no known further iterations of these avoidance schemes. They have therefore been successful in protecting revenues, but it is not possible to say how much would otherwise have been lost.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency Central Devon answering member printed Mel Stride question first answered 19/11/2018 15:49:21 answering member 3935 label Biography information for Mel Stride
	tabling member	4397 label Biography information for Peter Dowd

1007013

	registered interest
	date	14/11/2018
	answering body	Treasury
	answering dept id	14
	answering dept short name	Treasury
	answering dept sort name	Treasury
	hansard heading	Tax Avoidance
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, how much revenue has accrued to the public purse since 2011 from enabling HMRC to require a security from employers where there is a serious risk that tax due under PAYE or class 1 NICs will go unpaid.
	tabling member constituency	Bootle
	tabling member printed	Peter Dowd
	uin	191460
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/11/2018 answer text <p>HMRC do not measure revenue accruals from Security payments relating to PAYE and/or NICs as this type of intervention is a deposit in absolute terms, which is either used against unpaid liabilities as may be appropriate, or returned to the customer once the risk of non- payment has been reasonably mitigated; therefore the deposits are not additional monies outside of any such liability.</p> answering member constituency Central Devon answering member printed Mel Stride question first answered 19/11/2018 15:55:36 answering member 3935 label Biography information for Mel Stride
	tabling member	4397 label Biography information for Peter Dowd

1007014

	registered interest
	date	14/11/2018
	answering body	Treasury
	answering dept id	14
	answering dept short name	Treasury
	answering dept sort name	Treasury
	hansard heading	Tax Avoidance
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, how much revenue has accrued to the public purse since 2011 from the (a) introduction of anti-avoidance measures which have modified tax rules that apply to overseas life insurance companies and (b) application of the transfer of business rules when non-profit business is transferred to a non-EEA country.
	tabling member constituency	Bootle
	tabling member printed	Peter Dowd
	uin	191461
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/11/2018 answer text <p>Legislation was introduced following the 2010 Summer Budget to counter an avoidance scheme involving the transfer of insurance business with unrecognised profits. HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) is not aware of any instances of this avoidance entered into after the legislation was announced, but it is not possible to say how much tax would otherwise have been lost.</p><p>The changes referred to in the question relating to overseas life insurance companies and to transfers of business to non-EEA countries, also proposed in the 2010 Summer Budget, were not anti-avoidance measures. Subsequently Ministers decided not proceed with these measures so HMRC and industry could focus on the substantial changes to the tax rules for life insurance companies introduced in Finance Act 2012.</p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency Central Devon answering member printed Mel Stride question first answered 19/11/2018 15:52:56 answering member 3935 label Biography information for Mel Stride
	tabling member	4397 label Biography information for Peter Dowd

1007030

	registered interest
	date	14/11/2018
	answering body	Treasury
	answering dept id	14
	answering dept short name	Treasury
	answering dept sort name	Treasury
	hansard heading	Tax Avoidance
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, how much revenue has accrued to the public purse since 2013 from the introduction of anti-avoidance measures related to the introduction of a General Anti-Abuse Rule.
	tabling member constituency	Bootle
	tabling member printed	Peter Dowd
	uin	191462
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/11/2018 answer text <p>The General Anti-Abuse Rule (GAAR), introduced in 2013, is expected to raise £235m. The success of the GAAR should not be measured by how much it is expected to raise or the number of times the rule has been invoked.</p><p> </p><p>The principle purpose of the GAAR is to deter taxpayers from entering into abusive tax arrangements in the first place, and initial evidence suggests that GAAR is having this effect. Before HMRC can use the GAAR, it must first refer the case to the GAAR Advisory Panel, an external body separate to HMRC. To date the GAAR Advisory Panel has agreed with HMRC’s view on all cases referred to them. Their opinions are published on GOV.UK.</p> answering member constituency Central Devon answering member printed Mel Stride question first answered 19/11/2018 15:42:11 answering member 3935 label Biography information for Mel Stride
	tabling member	4397 label Biography information for Peter Dowd

1010650

	registered interest
	date	20/11/2018
	answering body	Treasury
	answering dept id	14
	answering dept short name	Treasury
	answering dept sort name	Treasury
	hansard heading	Tax Avoidance
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to the Answer of 7 November 2018 to Questions 185525-8 on Tax Avoidance, whom he defines as (a) employers and (b) individuals.
	tabling member constituency	Ribble Valley
	tabling member printed	Mr Nigel Evans
	uin	193399
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 28/11/2018 answer text <p>In the context of the legislation at S554A of ITEPA 2003, employers are those who have set up a disguised remuneration (DR) scheme and remunerated their staff or themselves through the DR scheme they have set up. Individuals are employees who are personally responsible for their tax arrangements because HMRC cannot reasonably collect the liability from the employer.</p><p>A breakdown of the number of DR users classified as employers who are individuals paid through their own limited companies is not available. However, the structure of this type of scheme and the costs involved with using one means that it is not likely to be an individual paying themselves through their own limited company.</p><p>HMRC are pursing employers who have used a DR scheme to pay their employees. So far, over 90% of the £650 million collected since Budget 2016 has been collected from employers.</p> answering member constituency Central Devon answering member printed Mel Stride grouped question UIN 193400 question first answered 28/11/2018 17:51:44 answering member 3935 label Biography information for Mel Stride
	tabling member	474 label Biography information for Mr Nigel Evans

1010651

	registered interest
	date	20/11/2018
	answering body	Treasury
	answering dept id	14
	answering dept short name	Treasury
	answering dept sort name	Treasury
	hansard heading	Tax Avoidance
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to the Answer of 7 November 2018 to Questions 185525-8 on Tax Avoidance, (a) how many and (b) what proportion of the scheme users classified as employers are individuals who were paid through their own limited companies.
	tabling member constituency	Ribble Valley
	tabling member printed	Mr Nigel Evans
	uin	193400
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 28/11/2018 answer text <p>In the context of the legislation at S554A of ITEPA 2003, employers are those who have set up a disguised remuneration (DR) scheme and remunerated their staff or themselves through the DR scheme they have set up. Individuals are employees who are personally responsible for their tax arrangements because HMRC cannot reasonably collect the liability from the employer.</p><p>A breakdown of the number of DR users classified as employers who are individuals paid through their own limited companies is not available. However, the structure of this type of scheme and the costs involved with using one means that it is not likely to be an individual paying themselves through their own limited company.</p><p>HMRC are pursing employers who have used a DR scheme to pay their employees. So far, over 90% of the £650 million collected since Budget 2016 has been collected from employers.</p> answering member constituency Central Devon answering member printed Mel Stride grouped question UIN 193399 question first answered 28/11/2018 17:51:44 answering member 3935 label Biography information for Mel Stride
	tabling member	474 label Biography information for Mr Nigel Evans

1010655

	registered interest
	date	20/11/2018
	answering body	Treasury
	answering dept id	14
	answering dept short name	Treasury
	answering dept sort name	Treasury
	hansard heading	Tax Avoidance
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to the Answer of 7 November 2018 to Questions 185525-8 on Tax Avoidance, how many promoters and providers of disguised remuneration schemes have been (a) pursued or investigated and (b) penalised or prosecuted by HMRC.
	tabling member constituency	Ribble Valley
	tabling member printed	Mr Nigel Evans
	uin	193401
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 28/11/2018 answer text <p>HMRC takes tackling promoters of avoidance schemes seriously, but does not currently categorise information in such a way as to identify disguised remuneration schemes specifically.</p><p> </p><p>In recent years, HMRC has been investigating over 100 promoters and others involved in avoidance, including disguised remuneration arrangements. In the last year, HMRC has taken litigation action against 5 scheme promoters for failure to disclose under Disclosure of Tax Avoidance Schemes with others deciding to disclose to avoid litigation. Further cases will be litigated in the year ahead.</p><p>HMRC has used its powers under the Promoters of Tax Avoidance Schemes to challenge promoters and others. HMRC has also made three successful complaints to the Advertising Standards Authority about misleading advertising; two of which relate to disguised remuneration schemes.</p><p> </p><p>HMRC will also consider criminal investigation and make referrals to prosecuting authorities, where appropriate. Since the formation of HMRC’s Fraud Investigation Service on 1 April 2016 more than 15 individuals have been convicted for offences relating to the promotion and operation of marketed tax avoidance schemes and sentenced to over 95 years custodial with an additional 4 years suspended sentences being ordered, additional matters are the subject of ongoing enquiries.</p> answering member constituency Central Devon answering member printed Mel Stride grouped question UIN 193402 question first answered 28/11/2018 17:48:26 answering member 3935 label Biography information for Mel Stride
	tabling member	474 label Biography information for Mr Nigel Evans

1010656

	registered interest
	date	20/11/2018
	answering body	Treasury
	answering dept id	14
	answering dept short name	Treasury
	answering dept sort name	Treasury
	hansard heading	Tax Avoidance
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to the Answer of 7 November 2018 to Questions 185525-8 on Tax Avoidance, what estimate he has made of the number of promoters and providers of disguised remuneration schemes he expects to be (a) pursued or investigated and (b) penalised or prosecuted by HMRC.
	tabling member constituency	Ribble Valley
	tabling member printed	Mr Nigel Evans
	uin	193402
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 28/11/2018 answer text <p>HMRC takes tackling promoters of avoidance schemes seriously, but does not currently categorise information in such a way as to identify disguised remuneration schemes specifically.</p><p> </p><p>In recent years, HMRC has been investigating over 100 promoters and others involved in avoidance, including disguised remuneration arrangements. In the last year, HMRC has taken litigation action against 5 scheme promoters for failure to disclose under Disclosure of Tax Avoidance Schemes with others deciding to disclose to avoid litigation. Further cases will be litigated in the year ahead.</p><p>HMRC has used its powers under the Promoters of Tax Avoidance Schemes to challenge promoters and others. HMRC has also made three successful complaints to the Advertising Standards Authority about misleading advertising; two of which relate to disguised remuneration schemes.</p><p> </p><p>HMRC will also consider criminal investigation and make referrals to prosecuting authorities, where appropriate. Since the formation of HMRC’s Fraud Investigation Service on 1 April 2016 more than 15 individuals have been convicted for offences relating to the promotion and operation of marketed tax avoidance schemes and sentenced to over 95 years custodial with an additional 4 years suspended sentences being ordered, additional matters are the subject of ongoing enquiries.</p> answering member constituency Central Devon answering member printed Mel Stride grouped question UIN 193401 question first answered 28/11/2018 17:48:26 answering member 3935 label Biography information for Mel Stride
	tabling member	474 label Biography information for Mr Nigel Evans