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

1308525

registered interest
date	14/04/2021
answering body	Treasury
answering dept id	14
answering dept short name	Treasury
answering dept sort name	Treasury
hansard heading	First-time Buyers: Stamp Duty Land Tax
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 potentially detrimental effects of the extension of the stamp duty holiday on the ability of first-time buyers to purchase a home; and what steps he is taking with Cabinet colleagues to mitigate those effects.
tabling member constituency	Ealing Central and Acton
tabling member printed	Dr Rupa Huq
uin	180563
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/04/2021 answer text <p>The temporary SDLT relief was designed to stimulate immediate momentum in a property market where property transactions fell by as much as 50 per cent during the COVID-19 lockdown in March. This momentum in the property market has supported jobs which rely on custom from the property industry, such as retailers and tradespeople.</p><p> </p><p>First Time Buyers will benefit from the increase in available properties and save up to an additional £10,000 in SDLT, on top of the £5,000 they could already save under First Time Buyers relief. When the nil rate band steps down to £250,000 in July, first-time buyers still benefit from their first-time buyer SDLT advantage.</p><p> </p><p>The Government has also introduced help for first-time buyers, particularly those with smaller deposits, through the new mortgage guarantee scheme which will help to re-introduce 95% loan to value mortgage products to first-time buyers.</p> answering member constituency Hereford and South Herefordshire answering member printed Jesse Norman question first answered 19/04/2021 14:30:32 answering member 3991 label Biography information for Jesse Norman
tabling member	4511 label Biography information for Dr Rupa Huq

1309136

registered interest
date	14/04/2021
answering body	Treasury
answering dept id	14
answering dept short name	Treasury
answering dept sort name	Treasury
hansard heading	Off-payroll Working: Prosecutions
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many IR35 cases have been pursued through tribunals and the courts.
tabling member constituency	Glasgow North West
tabling member printed	Carol Monaghan
uin	181049
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/04/2021 answer text <p>The vast majority of employment status decisions, including decisions on the off-payroll working rules (commonly known as IR35), are straightforward and settled without the need to go to tribunal. However, a number are more finely balanced, generally because of their complexity or because there are unusual circumstances and it is not possible to reach agreement. It is right for HMRC to litigate these cases.</p><p> </p><p>HMRC’s responsibilities are to secure the best practicable return for the Exchequer. Entering into, taking forward and resolving disputes contribute to meeting that objective. This requires consideration not only of the tax at stake in cases (i.e. a straightforward costs analysis) but also wider impacts, including potential tax liabilities of other taxpayers.</p><p> </p><p>Since 2001, HMRC has taken 40 cases regarding the off-payroll working rules to the Tax Tribunal.</p><p> </p><p>Work on off-payroll working rules cases is carried out by a number of HMRC teams. These teams are also involved in other cases and other litigation and as a result, HMRC do not hold specific information relating to the overall cost of pursuing cases (which is mitigated to some extent by HMRC’s recovery of costs in litigation which it wins).</p><p> </p><p>HMRC’s approach to litigation generally is set out in their published Litigation and Settlement Strategy. Disputes are costly for both HMRC and individual taxpayers and HMRC are committed to supporting taxpayers to get their tax right without the need for a dispute.</p> answering member constituency Hereford and South Herefordshire answering member printed Jesse Norman grouped question UIN 181050 181051 181052 question first answered 19/04/2021 14:22:45 answering member 3991 label Biography information for Jesse Norman
tabling member	4443 label Biography information for Carol Monaghan

1309139

registered interest
date	14/04/2021
answering body	Treasury
answering dept id	14
answering dept short name	Treasury
answering dept sort name	Treasury
hansard heading	Off-payroll Working: Prosecutions
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, how much HMRC has spent on pursuing IR35 cases through tribunals and the courts.
tabling member constituency	Glasgow North West
tabling member printed	Carol Monaghan
uin	181050
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/04/2021 answer text <p>The vast majority of employment status decisions, including decisions on the off-payroll working rules (commonly known as IR35), are straightforward and settled without the need to go to tribunal. However, a number are more finely balanced, generally because of their complexity or because there are unusual circumstances and it is not possible to reach agreement. It is right for HMRC to litigate these cases.</p><p> </p><p>HMRC’s responsibilities are to secure the best practicable return for the Exchequer. Entering into, taking forward and resolving disputes contribute to meeting that objective. This requires consideration not only of the tax at stake in cases (i.e. a straightforward costs analysis) but also wider impacts, including potential tax liabilities of other taxpayers.</p><p> </p><p>Since 2001, HMRC has taken 40 cases regarding the off-payroll working rules to the Tax Tribunal.</p><p> </p><p>Work on off-payroll working rules cases is carried out by a number of HMRC teams. These teams are also involved in other cases and other litigation and as a result, HMRC do not hold specific information relating to the overall cost of pursuing cases (which is mitigated to some extent by HMRC’s recovery of costs in litigation which it wins).</p><p> </p><p>HMRC’s approach to litigation generally is set out in their published Litigation and Settlement Strategy. Disputes are costly for both HMRC and individual taxpayers and HMRC are committed to supporting taxpayers to get their tax right without the need for a dispute.</p> answering member constituency Hereford and South Herefordshire answering member printed Jesse Norman grouped question UIN 181049 181051 181052 question first answered 19/04/2021 14:22:45 answering member 3991 label Biography information for Jesse Norman
tabling member	4443 label Biography information for Carol Monaghan

1309140

registered interest
date	14/04/2021
answering body	Treasury
answering dept id	14
answering dept short name	Treasury
answering dept sort name	Treasury
hansard heading	Off-payroll Working: Prosecutions
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, how much revenue to the Exchequer has been raised in pursuing IR35 cases through tribunals and the courts in the most recent period for which figures are available.
tabling member constituency	Glasgow North West
tabling member printed	Carol Monaghan
uin	181051
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/04/2021 answer text <p>The vast majority of employment status decisions, including decisions on the off-payroll working rules (commonly known as IR35), are straightforward and settled without the need to go to tribunal. However, a number are more finely balanced, generally because of their complexity or because there are unusual circumstances and it is not possible to reach agreement. It is right for HMRC to litigate these cases.</p><p> </p><p>HMRC’s responsibilities are to secure the best practicable return for the Exchequer. Entering into, taking forward and resolving disputes contribute to meeting that objective. This requires consideration not only of the tax at stake in cases (i.e. a straightforward costs analysis) but also wider impacts, including potential tax liabilities of other taxpayers.</p><p> </p><p>Since 2001, HMRC has taken 40 cases regarding the off-payroll working rules to the Tax Tribunal.</p><p> </p><p>Work on off-payroll working rules cases is carried out by a number of HMRC teams. These teams are also involved in other cases and other litigation and as a result, HMRC do not hold specific information relating to the overall cost of pursuing cases (which is mitigated to some extent by HMRC’s recovery of costs in litigation which it wins).</p><p> </p><p>HMRC’s approach to litigation generally is set out in their published Litigation and Settlement Strategy. Disputes are costly for both HMRC and individual taxpayers and HMRC are committed to supporting taxpayers to get their tax right without the need for a dispute.</p> answering member constituency Hereford and South Herefordshire answering member printed Jesse Norman grouped question UIN 181049 181050 181052 question first answered 19/04/2021 14:22:45 answering member 3991 label Biography information for Jesse Norman
tabling member	4443 label Biography information for Carol Monaghan

1309141

registered interest
date	14/04/2021
answering body	Treasury
answering dept id	14
answering dept short name	Treasury
answering dept sort name	Treasury
hansard heading	Off-payroll Working: Prosecutions
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether HMRC has undertaken a cost analysis of its pursuit of IR35 cases.
tabling member constituency	Glasgow North West
tabling member printed	Carol Monaghan
uin	181052
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/04/2021 answer text <p>The vast majority of employment status decisions, including decisions on the off-payroll working rules (commonly known as IR35), are straightforward and settled without the need to go to tribunal. However, a number are more finely balanced, generally because of their complexity or because there are unusual circumstances and it is not possible to reach agreement. It is right for HMRC to litigate these cases.</p><p> </p><p>HMRC’s responsibilities are to secure the best practicable return for the Exchequer. Entering into, taking forward and resolving disputes contribute to meeting that objective. This requires consideration not only of the tax at stake in cases (i.e. a straightforward costs analysis) but also wider impacts, including potential tax liabilities of other taxpayers.</p><p> </p><p>Since 2001, HMRC has taken 40 cases regarding the off-payroll working rules to the Tax Tribunal.</p><p> </p><p>Work on off-payroll working rules cases is carried out by a number of HMRC teams. These teams are also involved in other cases and other litigation and as a result, HMRC do not hold specific information relating to the overall cost of pursuing cases (which is mitigated to some extent by HMRC’s recovery of costs in litigation which it wins).</p><p> </p><p>HMRC’s approach to litigation generally is set out in their published Litigation and Settlement Strategy. Disputes are costly for both HMRC and individual taxpayers and HMRC are committed to supporting taxpayers to get their tax right without the need for a dispute.</p> answering member constituency Hereford and South Herefordshire answering member printed Jesse Norman grouped question UIN 181049 181050 181051 question first answered 19/04/2021 14:22:45 answering member 3991 label Biography information for Jesse Norman
tabling member	4443 label Biography information for Carol Monaghan

1306848

registered interest
date	13/04/2021
answering body	Treasury
answering dept id	14
answering dept short name	Treasury
answering dept sort name	Treasury
hansard heading	Sanitary Products: VAT
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment she has made of the effect on women's income of excluding reusable sanitary underwear from the new zero rate of VAT.
tabling member constituency	Wrexham
tabling member printed	Sarah Atherton
uin	178541
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 20/04/2021 answer text <p>A zero rate of VAT has applied to women’s sanitary products since 1 January 2021. This applies to those products which were previously subject to the reduced rate of 5 per cent, for example, tampons and pads, and to reusable menstrual products, such as keepers.</p><p> </p><p>The relief specifically excludes articles of clothing, such as “period pants”. Such exclusions are designed to ensure that the relief is properly targeted, since difficulties in policing the scope of the relief create the potential for litigation, erosion of the tax base and a reduction in revenue. Under existing rules “period pants” may already qualify for the zero rate, if they have been specifically designed to be worn by a child, meet the sizing criteria, and are held out for sale specifically for use by girls under the age of 14 years old.</p><p> </p><p>Details are provided in VAT Notice 714: zero-rating young children's clothing and footwear: <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/vat-notice-714-zero-rating-young-childrens-clothing-and-footwear/vat-notice-714-zero-rating-young-childrens-clothing-and-footwear#items-suitable-only-for-young-children" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/vat-notice-714-zero-rating-young-childrens-clothing-and-footwear/vat-notice-714-zero-rating-young-childrens-clothing-and-footwear#items-suitable-only-for-young-children</a>.</p><p> </p><p>The Treasury, along with other relevant departments, carefully considers the impact of its decisions on those sharing protected characteristics, including at Budgets and other fiscal events, in line with both its legal obligations and with its commitment to promoting fairness.</p> answering member constituency Hereford and South Herefordshire answering member printed Jesse Norman question first answered 20/04/2021 15:03:53 answering member 3991 label Biography information for Jesse Norman
tabling member	4855 label Biography information for Sarah Atherton

1308448

registered interest
date	13/04/2021
answering body	Treasury
answering dept id	14
answering dept short name	Treasury
answering dept sort name	Treasury
hansard heading	Music: SME Brexit Support Fund
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether small and medium sized enterprises trading in the music industry are eligible to apply for the SME Brexit Support Fund.
tabling member constituency	Cardiff West
tabling member printed	Kevin Brennan
uin	180414
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/04/2021 answer text <p>Small and medium-sized enterprises that were trading with the EU prior to 1 January are eligible for the SME Brexit Support Fund if they were only trading with the EU and therefore need to adjust to new customs, rules of origin, and VAT rules.</p> answering member constituency Hereford and South Herefordshire answering member printed Jesse Norman question first answered 19/04/2021 14:38:16 answering member 3991 label Biography information for Jesse Norman
tabling member	1400 label Biography information for Kevin Brennan

1308481

registered interest
date	13/04/2021
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, with reference to the implementation of changes to the loan charge, what estimate he has made of the number of people that are (a) falling into debt and (b) declaring bankruptcy as a result of those changes; and what assessment he has made of the effect on the mental health of people affected by those changes.
tabling member constituency	Coventry South
tabling member printed	Zarah Sultana
uin	180619
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 20/04/2021 answer text <p>No estimate can be provided for the number of people who have fallen into debt, or who have been declared bankrupt, as a result of the loan charge. Falling into debt or being declared bankrupt can occur for many reasons, not necessarily as a direct result of a loan charge liability.</p><p>HMRC are not always the only creditor; some individuals may fall into debt or are declared bankrupt as a result of a non-HMRC debt and some individuals may choose to enter insolvency themselves based on their overall financial position.</p><p>HMRC only ever consider insolvency as a last resort and encourage taxpayers to get in contact to agree the best way to settle their tax debts. Anyone who is worried about being able to pay what they owe is encouraged to get in touch with HMRC as soon as possible on 03000 599110. Where a taxpayer is unable to pay their debt in full HMRC will work with them to agree an instalment arrangement based on their individual financial circumstances, and there is no maximum length.</p><p>The Government recognises that tax burdens can add significant pressures. HMRC also recognise that some taxpayers need extra help because of their individual needs or circumstances. HMRC are committed to identifying and supporting taxpayers who need extra help with their tax affairs.</p><p>HMRC have signposted the extra help available to taxpayers in correspondence and on calls. Staff look out for indications that a taxpayer may need extra support, and where appropriate will transfer them to an Extra Support adviser who has the skills and knowledge needed to help them.</p> answering member constituency Hereford and South Herefordshire answering member printed Jesse Norman question first answered 20/04/2021 15:05:06 answering member 3991 label Biography information for Jesse Norman
tabling member	4786 label Biography information for Zarah Sultana

1308529

registered interest
date	13/04/2021
answering body	Treasury
answering dept id	14
answering dept short name	Treasury
answering dept sort name	Treasury
hansard heading	Greensill
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, if he will publish the minutes of the meetings held between officials in his Department and Greensill Capital; and whether there were any meetings that took place that were not minuted and for what reason.
tabling member constituency	Wallasey
tabling member printed	Dame Angela Eagle
uin	180408
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/04/2021 answer text <p>HM Treasury has released a range of information relating to this matter both proactively and in response to FOI requests including details of meetings held between Greensill and HM Treasury senior officials between April – June 2020.</p><p> </p><p>Links to these releases can be found online: <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/hm-treasury-greensill-meetings" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/hm-treasury-greensill-meetings</a> and <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/response-to-a-freedom-of-information-request-on-greensill" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/response-to-a-freedom-of-information-request-on-greensill</a></p> answering member constituency Salisbury answering member printed John Glen question first answered 19/04/2021 08:41:36 answering member 4051 label Biography information for John Glen
tabling member	491 label Biography information for Dame Angela Eagle

1308530

registered interest
date	13/04/2021
answering body	Treasury
answering dept id	14
answering dept short name	Treasury
answering dept sort name	Treasury
hansard heading	Greensill: Covid Corporate Financing Facility
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether he had any discussions with the Bank of England on the potential to grant Greensill Capital access to its Covid Corporate Financing Facility.
tabling member constituency	Wallasey
tabling member printed	Dame Angela Eagle
uin	180409
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/04/2021 answer text <p>In the context of discussions about Covid support schemes, the Bank, as operators of the CCFF, were informed that HM Treasury were not minded to adjust the scheme to include supply chain finance.</p> answering member constituency Salisbury answering member printed John Glen question first answered 19/04/2021 14:34:52 answering member 4051 label Biography information for John Glen
tabling member	491 label Biography information for Dame Angela Eagle