Asked by: Holly Lynch (Labour - Halifax)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many requests the Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation has received to grant licenses for legal fees to people designated under sanctions in the last 12 months; and how many and what proportion of those requests it has granted.
Answered by James Cartlidge - Shadow Secretary of State for Defence
The Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI) publishes the number of financial sanctions licences issued in its Annual Review. Information about the total number of licences and the total number of legal fees licences that OFSI has granted for the last five financial years can be found in OFSI’s Annual Review documents, which are publicly available on OFSI’s website. OFSI will publish the latest figures in the next Annual Review in due course.Asked by: Holly Lynch (Labour - Halifax)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether the special licenses granted by his Department to the law firm undertaking work on behalf of Yevgeny Prigozhin required Ministerial approval.
Answered by James Cartlidge - Shadow Secretary of State for Defence
HM Treasury does not comment on individual licensing cases.
HM Treasury’s Office for Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI) takes operational decisions relating to the implementation of financial sanctions in line with the relevant regulations. OFSI has not considered it appropriate for the Treasury to effectively decide on whether a case has sufficient merit to be permitted to proceed by deciding whether to license legal fees. Rather, OFSI's position has been that the merits should be decided by the appropriate court. OFSI assesses cases on a costs-basis only, ensuring that the fees requested are reasonable in accordance with the derogations available under the sanctions regimes.
We need to carefully balance the right to legal representation - which is a fundamental one - with wider issues, including the aim and purpose of the sanctions. It is right therefore that Ministers are examining whether there are any changes that can be made to this policy.
Asked by: Holly Lynch (Labour - Halifax)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many workstations were available for civil servants to use in his Department's offices as of 11 October 2022.
Answered by Felicity Buchan
HM Treasury has over 1000 workstations available to use across its 3 sites (London, Darlington and Norwich) which is sufficient to support staff attending the office at least 50% of the time.Asked by: Holly Lynch (Labour - Halifax)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what recent assessment his Department has made of the fairness of the High Income Child Benefit Charge.
Answered by Lucy Frazer
The High Income Child Benefit Charge (HICBC) is a tax charge which applies to anyone with an income of over £50,000 who gets Child Benefit, or whose partner receives it. The charge increases gradually for those with incomes between £50,000 and £60,000 and is equal to one per cent of a family’s Child Benefit for every extra £100 of income that is over £50,000 each year. Where income exceeds £60,000, the tax charge is equal to the amount payable in Child Benefit. HICBC is calculated on an individual rather than a household basis, in line with other income tax policy.
Basing HICBC on household incomes would mean finding out the incomes of everyone in each of the 7.7 million households currently registered for Child Benefit. This would effectively introduce a new means test, which would be costly to administer and create burdens on the majority of families who receive Child Benefit. The Government decided that charging HICBC to those on higher incomes ensures that everyone makes a fair contribution, while those with the lowest incomes continue to be supported.
The Government set the HICBC thresholds at these levels to help target public expenditure in the way it considered most effective. As with all elements of tax policy, the Government keeps this under review as part of the annual Budget process.
Asked by: Holly Lynch (Labour - Halifax)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment he has made of the potential merits of amending the mileage allowance payment per mile in light of the increasing cost of fuel.
Answered by Helen Whately - Shadow Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
The Government sets the Approved Mileage Allowance Payments (AMAPs) rates to minimise administrative burdens. AMAPs aim to reflect running costs including fuel, servicing and depreciation. Depreciation is estimated to constitute the most significant proportion of the AMAPs.
Employers are not required to use the AMAPs. Instead, they can agree to reimburse the actual cost incurred, where individuals can provide evidence of the expenditure, without an Income Tax or National Insurance charge arising.
Alternatively, they can choose to pay a different mileage rate that better reflects their employees’ circumstances. However, if the payment exceeds the amount due under AMAPs, and this results in a profit for the individual, they will be liable to pay Income Tax and National Insurance contributions on the difference.
The Government keeps this policy under review.
Asked by: Holly Lynch (Labour - Halifax)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment he has made of the potential merits of providing support for those who held policies with the Philips Trust Corporation Limited, following the company going into administration on 22 April 2022.
Answered by John Glen
The administrators of Philips Trust Corporation are working to secure the best results for customers and creditors.
As the Philips Trust Corporation was not a regulated firm, any losses are unlikely to be covered by the Financial Services Compensation Scheme, except in limited circumstances.
Asked by: Holly Lynch (Labour - Halifax)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment he has made of the potential merits of providing financial support to people who are clinically extremely vulnerable and who work in (a) the health and social sector and (b) other sectors that may put them at further risk of infection from covid-19.
Answered by Lucy Frazer
The Government has been clear on the need to balance the risk of infection for those who were previously identified as clinically extremely vulnerable with the benefits of gradually returning to normal life. The Government will continue to assess the situation and the risks posed by COVID-19 and, based on clinical advice, will respond accordingly to keep the most vulnerable safe.
Vaccines are expected to be largely effective against severe disease. Those at higher clinical risk have been prioritised for third doses or booster vaccines and are being encouraged to take up that offer as soon as possible. In addition, there are new therapeutic and antiviral treatments being made available within the community to NHS patients at greater risk.
On 8 December 2021, the Government implemented its Plan B response to managing COVID-19. Plan B has been designed to help control the virus’s spread while avoiding unduly damaging economic and social restrictions. The measures under Plan B, including introducing face coverings, mandatory certification, and working from home, will help to reduce transmission, adding a further layer of protection for the most vulnerable.