Asked by: Carol Monaghan (Scottish National Party - Glasgow North West)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether HMRC has undertaken a cost analysis of its pursuit of IR35 cases.
Answered by Jesse Norman - Shadow Leader of the House of Commons
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.
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.
Since 2001, HMRC has taken 40 cases regarding the off-payroll working rules to the Tax Tribunal.
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).
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.
Asked by: Carol Monaghan (Scottish National Party - Glasgow North West)
Question to the HM Treasury:
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.
Answered by Jesse Norman - Shadow Leader of the House of Commons
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.
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.
Since 2001, HMRC has taken 40 cases regarding the off-payroll working rules to the Tax Tribunal.
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).
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.
Asked by: Carol Monaghan (Scottish National Party - Glasgow North West)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, how much HMRC has spent on pursuing IR35 cases through tribunals and the courts.
Answered by Jesse Norman - Shadow Leader of the House of Commons
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.
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.
Since 2001, HMRC has taken 40 cases regarding the off-payroll working rules to the Tax Tribunal.
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).
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.
Asked by: Carol Monaghan (Scottish National Party - Glasgow North West)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many IR35 cases have been pursued through tribunals and the courts.
Answered by Jesse Norman - Shadow Leader of the House of Commons
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.
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.
Since 2001, HMRC has taken 40 cases regarding the off-payroll working rules to the Tax Tribunal.
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).
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.
Asked by: Carol Monaghan (Scottish National Party - Glasgow North West)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what plans he has to reduce VAT on essential repairs to pre-1919 properties.
Answered by Jesse Norman - Shadow Leader of the House of Commons
There was previously a zero rate of VAT on restorative work to listed and historic buildings. However, the relief was mainly being used to carry out extension work, which was contrary to the intent of the legislation to preserve heritage, and was removed following consultation in 2012.
The Government has no current plans to change the VAT treatment of restorative construction work on listed and historic buildings.
It is noticeable how many Members have raised today the issue of the self-employed and freelancers, such as musicians, actors and dancers, who have had little or no support throughout the pandemic. Rather than suggest that they abandon years of dedication and training, will the Chancellor now consider initiatives such …
..."Asked by: Carol Monaghan (Scottish National Party - Glasgow North West)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, when he plans to respond to the correspondence of 19 June 2020 from the hon. Member for Glasgow North West on access to the Self-Employment Income Support Scheme and amendments and submissions made after 26 March.
Answered by Jesse Norman - Shadow Leader of the House of Commons
HM Treasury asked HMRC to respond as they have operational responsibility for the Self-Employment Income Support Scheme. Ruth Stanier, Director General, duly replied to the correspondence on 7 September. HMRC apologise for the delay in replying.
Asked by: Carol Monaghan (Scottish National Party - Glasgow North West)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether companies in breach of consumer contracts are eligible for covid-19 support.
Answered by Kemi Badenoch - Leader of HM Official Opposition
The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) enforces rules on unfair contract terms. On 30th April the CMA published a statement on its views on consumer protection law including in relation to COVID-19. People and businesses who have seen or experienced businesses behaving unfairly during the coronavirus outbreak can report it to the CMA by using their dedicated webpage: https://www.coronavirus-business-complaint.service.gov.uk/.
The Government has announced unprecedented support for business and workers to protect them against the current economic emergency including almost £300 billion of guarantees – equivalent to 15% of UK GDP. The Business Support website provides further information about how businesses can access the support that has been made available, who is eligible and how to apply - https://www.gov.uk/business-coronavirus-support-finder.