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 question first answered answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

1403433

registered interest
date	17/01/2022
answering body	Treasury
answering dept id	14
answering dept short name	Treasury
answering dept sort name	Treasury
hansard heading	Business: Coronavirus
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what estimate he has made of the proportion of the £4.3 billion fraudulently claimed through covid-19 support payments which is yet to be recovered which comes from debt in (a) Plymouth, (b) Devon and (c) Cornwall.
tabling member constituency	Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport
tabling member printed	Luke Pollard
uin	105724
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 25/01/2022 answer text <p>HMRC’s estimate for the amount lost to fraud and error in the schemes during 2020- 21 is 8.7 per cent in Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme (CJRS), 2.5 per cent in Self-Employment Income Support Scheme phases 1-3, and 8.5 per cent in the Eat Out to Help Out (EOHO) scheme. This equates to £5.8 billion, against a spend of £81.2 billion.</p><p> </p><p>HMRC prioritised getting money to those who needed it with the schemes designed to minimise fraud while not unnecessarily delaying payments. The schemes were designed to prevent fraud, both in the eligibility criteria and the claim process itself. However, they could still be attractive to fraudsters.</p><p> </p><p>To ensure quick payment, HMRC undertook pre-payment risk assessments of 22 million claims (£93 billion) within 72 hours of receipt, blocking those indicating criminal activity.</p><p> </p><p>HMRC have taken a supportive and reasonable approach where mistakes have been made, giving customers the opportunity to correct them without fear of sanctions. By law, claimants can notify and amend incorrect claims within 90 days without penalty. An online system to help people correct mistakes was set up and all claims are risk assessed and considered for post payment checks. HMRC look at a variety of factors, including comparing the claims to historic data (e.g. pre-pandemic payroll data), third party information, and other intelligence, like Fraud Hotline calls. HMRC have also compared claims made to different support schemes to identify where they might want to ask more questions, such as in the case of a restaurant who had furloughed all their staff under CJRS but were also claiming under the EOHO scheme.</p><p> </p><p>Claims HMRC think are higher risk, or appear more complex, are selected for “One-to-One” intervention (OTO). Lower or less complex risk claims are considered for “One-to-Many” (OTM) Campaigns.</p><p> </p><p>OTM are written campaigns to address simpler risks. The same communication is sent to up to tens of thousands of customers. HMRC are clear with what they are asking, where to get support, and how to put it right. They also ensure there is follow up if customers do not respond to the OTM approach.</p><p> </p><p>OTO interventions are direct enquiries by experienced compliance officers for more complex risks.</p><p> </p><p>HMRC are taking tough action to tackle fraudulent behaviour. Anyone who keeps money despite knowing they were not entitled to it, faces repaying up to double the amount, plus interest and potentially criminal prosecution in serious cases.</p><p> </p><p>HMRC established the Taxpayer Protection Taskforce, which is estimated to recover approximately £800 million to £1 billion in the two years to 2022-23, on top of around £500 million which was recovered in 2020-21. HMRC will continue to address fraud and error in the schemes beyond the duration of the taskforce.</p><p> </p><p>For COVID-19 schemes, compliance checks are carried out when HMRC suspects there has been an overpayment of the claim, which may be due to either error or fraud. This work is still ongoing and therefore HMRC cannot say what proportion of any amount that is fraudulently claimed will be from businesses based in Plymouth, Devon, and Cornwall.</p> answering member constituency South East Cambridgeshire answering member printed Lucy Frazer question first answered 25/01/2022 15:54:40 answering member 4517 label Biography information for Lucy Frazer
tabling member	4682 label Biography information for Luke Pollard

1382342

registered interest
date	25/11/2021
answering body	Treasury
answering dept id	14
answering dept short name	Treasury
answering dept sort name	Treasury
hansard heading	Water Companies: Fines
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what his planning assumption is on the amount the Exchequer will receive in fines from water companies in each of the next five years.
tabling member constituency	Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport
tabling member printed	Luke Pollard
uin	82080
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 03/12/2021 answer text <p>We are unable to forecast sector specific fines, which are set as an outcome to legal proceedings and vary based on the offence.</p><p> </p><p>In the period from 2010 to date, the Environment Agency have brought 190 successful prosecutions against the Water Companies with the Courts imposing fines of approximately £140 million.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency Faversham and Mid Kent answering member printed Helen Whately question first answered 03/12/2021 13:20:17 answering member 4527 label Biography information for Helen Whately
tabling member	4682 label Biography information for Luke Pollard

1366164

registered interest
date	04/11/2021
answering body	Treasury
answering dept id	14
answering dept short name	Treasury
answering dept sort name	Treasury
hansard heading	Ministerial Boxes
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, how much the green ministerial box cost that he used as a prop for a photoshoot at COP26; what budget the funding came from to pay for the box; and what plans he has for reusing the box.
tabling member constituency	Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport
tabling member printed	Luke Pollard
uin	69694
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 09/11/2021 answer text <p>The green briefcase was made available to the Chancellor by an official COP26 sponsor as part of COP26 Finance Day.</p><p><strong> </strong></p> answering member constituency Faversham and Mid Kent answering member printed Helen Whately question first answered 09/11/2021 16:54:59 answering member 4527 label Biography information for Helen Whately
tabling member	4682 label Biography information for Luke Pollard

1365952

registered interest
date	03/11/2021
answering body	Treasury
answering dept id	14
answering dept short name	Treasury
answering dept sort name	Treasury
hansard heading	Treasury: Ivory
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what estimate he has made of the number of ivory items owned by or collated by his Department.
tabling member constituency	Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport
tabling member printed	Luke Pollard
uin	69186
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 12/11/2021 answer text <p>We have not made any estimates of the number of ivory items owned by or collated in this Department or institutions owned or managed by the Government.</p> answering member constituency Faversham and Mid Kent answering member printed Helen Whately question first answered 12/11/2021 12:08:19 answering member 4527 label Biography information for Helen Whately
tabling member	4682 label Biography information for Luke Pollard

1348625

registered interest
date	20/07/2021
answering body	Treasury
answering dept id	14
answering dept short name	Treasury
answering dept sort name	Treasury
hansard heading	Carbon Emissions: Taxation
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, if he will hold discussions with the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs on the potential merits of bringing forward legislative proposals to introduce a carbon tax for carbon intensive food imports.
tabling member constituency	Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport
tabling member printed	Luke Pollard
uin	36764
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 26/07/2021 answer text <p>As a global leader on decarbonisation, the UK recognises the importance of ensuring that policy interventions to cut domestic emissions do not lead to increased emissions elsewhere.</p><p> </p><p>A range of approaches could potentially help to address this risk, of which carbon border adjustment mechanisms are one. However, it is important any policy complies with our international obligations, including under the World Trade Organization and our Free Trade Agreements.</p><p> </p><p>Treasury ministers and officials are in regular contact with colleagues across the government on all matters related to the Net Zero transition.</p> answering member constituency Saffron Walden answering member printed Kemi Badenoch question first answered 26/07/2021 14:30:25 answering member 4597 label Biography information for Kemi Badenoch
tabling member	4682 label Biography information for Luke Pollard

1301360

registered interest
date	10/03/2021
answering body	Treasury
answering dept id	14
answering dept short name	Treasury
answering dept sort name	Treasury
hansard heading	Incentives
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 potential merits of reintroducing the Job Retention Bonus; and when he plans to publish guidance on retention incentives.
tabling member constituency	Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport
tabling member printed	Luke Pollard
uin	166555
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 18/03/2021 answer text <p>The objective of the Job Retention Bonus (JRB) was to incentivise employers to retain employees between November, when the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme (CJRS) was due to end, and the end of January 2021. However, the subsequent extension of the CJRS to April (now September) allowed employers to retain their staff during that period by covering 80% of the furloughed employees’ wages. Given this further extension to the end of September, the original policy intent of the JRB has fallen away.</p><p> </p><p>The Government remains committed to deploying a retention incentive at the appropriate time.</p> answering member constituency Hereford and South Herefordshire answering member printed Jesse Norman question first answered 18/03/2021 11:46:47 answering member 3991 label Biography information for Jesse Norman
tabling member	4682 label Biography information for Luke Pollard

1299752

registered interest
date	04/03/2021
answering body	Treasury
answering dept id	14
answering dept short name	Treasury
answering dept sort name	Treasury
hansard heading	Landfill Tax
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what plans he has to change the landfill tax of flat glass from the lower rate to the standard rate.
tabling member constituency	Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport
tabling member printed	Luke Pollard
uin	163301
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 09/03/2021 answer text <p>Materials liable for the lower rate of landfill tax, including glass, are listed in the 2011 Qualifying Materials Order. When assessing which materials are liable for the lower rate, the Government considers whether they are non-hazardous, have low potential for greenhouse gas emissions and have low polluting potential in the landfill environment. Further information can be found at <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/excise-notice-lft1-a-general-guide-to-landfill-tax/excise-notice-lft1-a-general-guide-to-landfill-tax#lower-rate-qualifying-material" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/excise-notice-lft1-a-general-guide-to-landfill-tax/excise-notice-lft1-a-general-guide-to-landfill-tax#lower-rate-qualifying-material</a></p><p> </p><p>The Government has no plans to change the landfill tax rate for flat glass, though continues to keep tax policy under review.</p><p> </p><p>Defra has funded Environment Agency/WRAP guidance on the proper collection and reprocessing of flat glass with the aim of increasing recycling rates. The Environment Agency is set to review this in May 2021.</p><p> </p><p>The Environmental (England and Wales) Permitting Regulation 2016 includes a statutory permit condition for landfill and incineration permit holders, placing a restriction on plastic, metal, paper or glass separately collected for reuse or recycling from being accepted for landfill or incineration unless it is the result of treatment operations and delivers the best environmental outcome in accordance with the waste hierarchy.</p><p> </p><p>Flat glass is a common waste product from construction and demolition. In the Resources &amp; Waste Strategy 2018, we committed to increasing resource efficiency and minimising waste in the construction sector, through working with the Green Construction Board.</p><p><strong> </strong></p><p> </p> answering member constituency Saffron Walden answering member printed Kemi Badenoch question first answered 09/03/2021 10:15:38 answering member 4597 label Biography information for Kemi Badenoch
tabling member	4682 label Biography information for Luke Pollard

1285128

registered interest
date	09/02/2021
answering body	Treasury
answering dept id	14
answering dept short name	Treasury
answering dept sort name	Treasury
hansard heading	State Retirement Pensions
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether he has plans amend his policies on the triple lock on state pensions.
tabling member constituency	Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport
tabling member printed	Luke Pollard
uin	151833
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 15/02/2021 answer text <p>Due to the unprecedented economic circumstances, average earnings fell last year. Under current legislation, this would mean a freeze to State Pensions. However, the Government took action by legislating to give the Government the ability to increase State Pension and Pension Credit rates for 2021/22. This enabled the Government to honour its manifesto commitment to the Triple Lock which uprates the State Pension each year by the highest of average earnings growth, price inflation and 2.5%. As announced by the Secretary of State for the Department for Work and Pensions on 25 November, the new State Pension and the basic State Pension will both be increased by 2.5% this April.</p><p> </p><p>As with all aspects of Government policy with major spending implications, any decisions on future changes to the Triple Lock will be taken as part of the annual Budget process in the context of the wider public finances. Final decisions on uprating policy for pensions and welfare benefits are taken by the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions through her annual uprating review.</p> answering member constituency North East Cambridgeshire answering member printed Steve Barclay question first answered 15/02/2021 11:17:09 answering member 4095 label Biography information for Steve Barclay
tabling member	4682 label Biography information for Luke Pollard

1273191

registered interest
date	30/12/2020
answering body	Treasury
answering dept id	14
answering dept short name	Treasury
answering dept sort name	Treasury
hansard heading	Self-assessment: Coronavirus
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what flexibility is provided in his plans to allow an additional 12 months for self-assessment taxpayers to pay their liabilities.
tabling member constituency	Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport
tabling member printed	Luke Pollard
uin	133170
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 14/01/2021 answer text <p>The Chancellor understands that many Self-Assessment taxpayers may find it difficult paying their Self-Assessment liabilities that become due on 31 January 2021, due to the impact of the coronavirus pandemic.</p><p> </p><p>Therefore, on 1 October 2020, the Chancellor announced that from that date HMRC’s online payment service had been upgraded to enable more taxpayers to set up a Time To Pay instalment payment plan without the need to contact HMRC beforehand. The threshold for using this service was increased from £10,000 to £30,000. HMRC estimate that the increase in this threshold will enable 95% of the Self-Assessment liabilities becoming due on 31 January 2021 to be paid this way.</p><p> </p><p>Those taxpayers with Self-Assessment liabilities in excess of £30,000 can still contact HMRC to set up a bespoke Time To Pay arrangement appropriate to their personal circumstances.</p><p> </p><p>HMRC can be flexible with the duration of payment instalments. If a taxpayer needs longer than 12 months to settle their tax liabilities they are encouraged to contact HMRC in the usual way to agree a longer payment plan.</p> answering member constituency Hereford and South Herefordshire answering member printed Jesse Norman question first answered 14/01/2021 11:32:18 answering member 3991 label Biography information for Jesse Norman
tabling member	4682 label Biography information for Luke Pollard

1245145

registered interest
date	20/10/2020
answering body	Treasury
answering dept id	14
answering dept short name	Treasury
answering dept sort name	Treasury
hansard heading	Beekeeping: Equipment
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what plans he has to adjust the rate of VAT applied to bee keeping equipment after the end of the transition period.
tabling member constituency	Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport
tabling member printed	Luke Pollard
uin	106490
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 28/10/2020 answer text <p>VAT is a broad based tax on consumption and the twenty per cent standard rate applies to most goods and services, including on equipment used for bee keeping. Businesses that are registered for VAT will usually be able to reclaim the VAT they incur when they purchase these items for business purposes.</p><p> </p><p>Changing the rate of VAT on bee keeping equipment would come at a cost to the Exchequer. Although the Government keeps all taxes under review, the Government has no current plans to change the VAT treatment of such goods.</p> answering member constituency Hereford and South Herefordshire answering member printed Jesse Norman question first answered 28/10/2020 15:05:23 answering member 3991 label Biography information for Jesse Norman
tabling member	4682 label Biography information for Luke Pollard