Asked by: Lord Strasburger (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Agnew of Oulton on 14 September (HL7716), whether they will now answer the question put, namely (1) what was the cost to the Exchequer of misuse of Low Value Consignment Relief (LVCR) over the entire period that misuse took place, and (2) what was the number of retailers who did pay VAT and went out of business as a result of the misuse of LVCR by others.
Answered by Lord Agnew of Oulton
The Government does not have an estimate of the cost to the Exchequer of the misuse of Low Value Consignment Relief (LVCR). There is also no estimate of the number of compliant retailers that went out of business because of the misuse of LVCR by others.
The figure of £90 million additional yield for 2012/13 resulting from the removal of LVCR given in the previous answer is an indication of the extent of the misuse in the Channel Islands. The total yield for this measure over the period 2012/13–2016/17 was £500 million.
Asked by: Lord Strasburger (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether Richard Allen was rewarded for his whistle blowing role in alerting them and Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs to the misuse of Low Value Consignment Relief, as provided for by section 26 of the Commissioners for Customs and Excise Act 2005; and if not, why not.
Answered by Lord Agnew of Oulton
HMRC do have the discretion to pay rewards, and these are based on what is achieved as a direct result of information provided. HMRC conduct an internal review process for determining whether or not a reward is payable and, if so, how much that reward should be. Rewards are offered at HMRC’s discretion and are not calculated as a means of compensation for the cost of gathering information that is subsequently supplied to HMRC, nor are they subject to negotiation.
HMRC’s policy is to neither confirm nor deny the existence of information provided by individuals or to confirm the fact that any individual has, or has not, provided information, directly or by inference, including comment on specific reward payments. In common with other law enforcement agencies in the UK, HMRC maintain this stance as a means of effective protection of the public interest; to protect the safety of any informants and to ensure that future potential informants are not discouraged from coming forward.
Asked by: Lord Strasburger (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what action they took and when to address concerns raised by Richard Allen and others that Low Value Consignment Relief (LVCR) was being used for a purpose for which it was not intended; what estimate they have made of (1) the cost to the Exchequer of misuse of LVCR not being addressed sooner, and (2) the number of retailers who did pay VAT and went out of business as a result of the misuse of LVCR by others.
Answered by Lord Agnew of Oulton
In April 2012 the Government took action to remove Low Value Consignment Relief (LVCR) for goods imported from the Channel Islands. Estimates were published at the time showing yield from this measure to be £90 million in 2012-13.
From 1 January 2021 the Government will be introducing changes that will see the removal of LVCR from all imports and make online marketplaces liable for VAT on low value imported goods sold through their websites.